Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1995/07/19 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Council Chambers 7:03 p.m. Public Services Building Wednesday, July 19, 1995 276 Fourth Avenue~ Chula Vista ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Tuchscher, Commissioners Ray, Salas, Tarantino, Thomas, and Willett COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director Lee, Community Development Director Salomone, Environmental Review Coordinator Reid, Environmental Projects Manager Monaco, Sr. Civil Engineer Thomas, Traffic Engineer Rosenberg, Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman, Assistant Attorney Moore PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Tuchscher led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag and a moment of silence. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chair Tuchscher reviewed the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None ITEM 1: PUBLIC HEARING: MCA CHULA VISTA AMPHITHEATER DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR-95-03 Environmental Projects Manager Monaco presented the staff report, and recommended that the Planning Commission open the public hearing and accept comments on the EIR. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Chuck Schrader, 440 "L" Street, Apt. I, Chula Vista, spoke in favor of the project. He thought it would be a good way to get tax revenue. The City of Chula Vista is becoming a PC Minutes -2- July 19, 1995 major city in its own right, but is still looked upon as a suburb of San Diego. Becoming recognized as a city in its own right, this MCA project would bring that type of recognition. People could have entertainment in Chula Vista without having to leave the city limits to go to San Diego or elsewhere. Mr. Schrader said that with the development of the Olympic Training Center, the athletes living in that area and training will need to release some of their energy. He thought this would be a plus to Chula Vista and to the Olympic Training Center, and a good tax revenue for the City. Mr. Schrader felt the MCA project would be a very good project environmentally. The sounds would be muffled with trees, shrubberies, grass and all types of landscaping and better for the environment. Regarding traffic, he felt the impact would be only for a short time before and after the concert. Mr. Schrader noted that the type of entertainment would determine the age of the concert goers, and that music has a little bit to offer for everybody. It looked to him like a win-win-win situation. He would like to see it go through. Chris Bitterlin, the Bitterlin Companies, 3716 Southernwood Way, San Diego, clarified that the Mr. Schrader was not on their payroll nor a relative, but he appreciated the nice thoughts. He noted that President of MCA Concerts, Jay Marciano, would be at the meeting on August 9, along with the operations expert from MCA, Bill Parsons. Mr. Bitterlin gave some history of trying to locate in San Diego County. He stated there is an average of 30 to 35 concerts a year. The focus was not simply limited to economics. Two issues that had to be solved up front were sound and traffic. They needed to find a location that would not impact existing or futura housing. MCA desired to develop an amphitheater in San Diego County and, specifically, in Chula Vista, but they would only make this major investment if they believed they could be a good neighbor. He then introduced Bill Bethman. Bill Bethman, BBA, 24462 La Hermosa, Laguna Nigel, spoke about the site development plan and the architecture. He noted that the orientation of the amphitheater in a northwesterly direction would help in a natural way to mitigate sound to the most sensitive areas to the west and south. In addition, the actual location on the property, getting as far east as possible, would help in maintaining a natural mitigation to the west and to the Dennery Ranch area. The facility had approximately 10,000 fixed seats plus another 10,000 seats in the grassed area. Mr. Bethman discussed the amenities of the amphitheater. He stated that the new philosophy in amphitheaters of which MCA is the forerunner is to create a facility where a person comes back to the facility not just because they are coming back to see their favorite act or entertainer, but to experience the facility. He then turned the presentation back to Chris Bitterlin. Mr. Bitterlin commented about MCA with respect to traffic. From an environmental standpoint, with a worst case scenario of 20,000 people and 6,000 cars, MCA was expert in dealing with large numbers of people at any given time, coordinating traffic and security. Mr. Bitterlin said it was important that the experience is a good one for the concert goers when they come to the facility, that traffic situation is not difficult, that they are treated properly, and that by the time they leave they not only enjoy themselves, but it was a streamlined experience. Mr. Bitterlin said MCA believed this was an excellent site, and were excited about the project as designed. PC Minutes -3- July 19, 1995 Commissioner Tarantino questioned the location of the restrooms, and if they would service the people in the grassed area. Mr. Bitterlin said there were no restrooms located on the top of the berm. They were located very close to the stairs which radiate across the top of the berm and come down into the plaza. They had located a restroom building at each location and believed there approximately 50 fixture units in each of those. He believed they would more than adequately serve the lawn patrons. Commissioner Tarantino asked if they had any comments from the Baldwin Company in terms of the Otay Ranch. Chair Tuchscher stated that he had just been handed a speaker slip from Mr. Aden of the Baldwin Company to address the Commission. Commissioner Tarantino asked, in terms of traffic leaving, if it would be like trying to get out of San Diego Stadium. Mr. Bitterlin replied that it would not. Commissioner Salas stated that the City of San Diego objected to the EIR in that the Robinhood Ridge and the Dennery Ranch precise plans would lie within the 50 decibel noise contour. She asked if the applicant had any drawings that show where those projects occurred within that 50 decibel range area. Mr. Bitterlin asked if she was referring specifically to the Dennery and Robinhood--the City of San Diego future developments? Commissioner Salas confirmed. Mr. Bitterlin stated that on page 18 of the technical appendices, there was a specific drawing with respect to the 50 dB line, and Jack Wrightson could talk about the significance of that line. He noted, however, that they did not violate the City of San Diego's noise ordinance with the sound levels that would be generated from the amphitheater. Commissioner Salas couldn't tell how far away 50 decibels carried and asked if they had any kind of estimate of how far that sound carried. Mr. Bitterlin introduced Mr. Wrightson, their sound expert. Jack Wrightson, Wrightson, Johnson, Hadden and Williams, said they were acoustical consultants of Dallas, Texas, employed by MCA on this project to give them an understanding of potential kmpact of the amphitheater operation. He stated that MCA is committed to not developing projects where they were going to have problems. They don't envision themselves PC Minutes -4- July 19, 1995 being in a continual battle with any governmental agency or the residents that may happen to live in the environments of one of their facilities. He explained that with the calculation between industrial and residential areas that are within the City of San Diego noise ordinances, MCA would technically be allowed to make more noise with this facility than 50 dBA; however, MCA understands that 50 dBA is a cut-off line between when people can live with it versus when people start being extremely unhappy with the noise levels. They wanted to make sure that these areas in San Diego are exposed to levels of 50 dBA or less. The 50 dBA and the contours is really an MCA internal standard for how much noise that they care to place on any residential area and independent of any noise ordinance. The Dennery Ranch situation was one of the reasons why the facility was moved to the east to further move the noise away from Dennery to create the situation the MCA was looking for. The propagation of sound over great distances, over 1500 feet, is affected by a number of factors including how much energy sound loses just through the effort of trying to travel from point A to point B, and the fact that sound spreads over a larger area, which means there is on a unit quantity basis. As sound continues farther away, it loses intensity. He gave examples of noise attenuation. In the Robinhood and Dennery Ranch area, two sound tests were run. The second sound test was basically in order to confirm the results of the first sound test transferred to the second. They did not try to replicate the second sound test, but were looking for additional data. The report referenced those two tests and they were done slightly differently. Everything referred back to the first sound test in terms of methodology and how loud the amphitheater would be. Mr. Wrightson stated that the dB line could be anywhere from 7,000 to i0,000 feet away from the amphitheater--in very rough terms, a mile and a half to two miles. Commissioner Salas asked if 50 dBA was equivalent to light auto traffic. Mr. Wrightson replied that the standard metric for 24-hours on roadway use is an annualized average of 65, which is much lower than what most people listen to the radio and television in their house. If the ambient were very, very low, 50 dBA would be noticeable. In a built-up urban environment, the overall ambient level is raised, but still controlled mostly by vehicular traffic in residential areas. Commissioner Salas clarified that if the ambient noise level in a neighborhood is 40, then the 50 dBA would not be noticed as much as if the ambient level was at 30? Mr. Wrightson concurred. If the ambient is very, very low, then a noise doesn't have to be very loud to be obvious. As the ambient gets higher, less and less of the noises are obvious. Commissioner Willett was concerned about the sound going up the canyon for Dennery and Robinhood Ridge. On page 17, it would have been easier to evaluate the 70 dB line, a 60, a 55, and a dB, by actually taking that measurement off the topographic map. Regarding noise containment or reduction, he suggested putting at the top of the berm the 15 to 20 foot wall supplanted with trees to break that rolling sound that's going out. PC Minutes -5- July 19, 1995 Mr. Wrightson felt that was an excellent comment and that placement of a wall and other physical construction, as well as administrative control which has to do with control of the sound level inside of the facility, were both the fundamental efforts of any mitigation plan. Commissioner Willett also believed there was a misconception regarding the location of the top set of speakers which were almost at the same height as the far 40 foot berm. He asked if that was correct for the seating and line sight. Mr. Wrightson said they were elevated above the stage but they were a little less than that. He noted that the fact that the main speakers were inside the stage house was a fundamental issue on the noise mitigation. Commissioner Willett commented that the sound would be going out and over the far seating. There would be nothing to stop it. Mr. Wrightson concurred and said that was the mason for the addition of walls which would be one of the mitigation measures. Commissioner Willett commented on the overflow, park and grass area, and asked if it would be next to the wildlife habitat corridor going up along the Otay River. He asked if the habitat was protected from the noise by putting extensive berming around that? On the south side going up the hill, Mr. Willett's suggestion was that it be heavily planted with native trees and coastal sage to stop the sound rolling up the hill and then rolling up the first canyon to Robinhood and the second canyon to Dennery. Mr. Wrightson stated that to the south and the west, they were depending on physical construction to provide most of the sound attenuation, in addition to the orientation. He said the canyons were both a blessing and a curse from a noise standpoint. In most locations in the canyons, it does a very effective job of cutting off line of sight to this facility. The canyon causes a problem. They had made extensive measurements in that area to document that phenomena and it was a pretty ragged line running through there just because of the effect of the canyons. The best thing they could do was to build a substantial stagehouse and those auxiliary structures, and make it massive to knock down the sound dramatically going into those areas. Commissioner Willett commented that the EIR reported that MCA would be using shields for lighting, but light tended to bounce off of other structures. He assumed that all the lighting would be pointed towards the stage area, but the lighting on the further berm of the grass seating would be higher than the stage structure and would be going up the hillside. Mr. Bitterlin said the tops of the light standards in the parking lot would in some cases be a little higher than the light in the lawn seating berm. However, they were also quite distant from the back of the berm and would not be an intrusion into the facility itself. There are glare guards on all of those fixtures so the light is somewhat trapped on site. PC Minutes -6- July 19, 1995 Commissioner Thomas said he would feel more comfortable if the sound mitigated measures were done at construction, not after the fact. He thought the mitigation factors would be necessary, and that they would have to be retrofitted. He would feel a lot more comfortable in having that sound mitigation done at the time of construction, he thought that everybody was uncomfortable with the level of the sound. Mr. Bitterlin replied that with respect to the agreed-upon mitigation measures in the EIR, consistent with those mitigation measures is the statement that MCA is assuming the risk of complying with the City of Chula Vista's noise element to the extent that there are no existing impacted residences at the time that we build this facility. The existing housing in Chula Vista is absolutely not effected, inaudible, even without mitigation. MCA agreed to the mitigation that demonstrates the confidence that MCA has in being a good neighbor and complying with the Chula Vista ordinance and that is the risk that MCA has chosen to assume. Commissioner Thomas asked how MCA planned to get 20,000 people out of three lanes going west. He asked what level of concerts they hoped to attract in relationship to people, and what kind of groups they were attracting. Mr. Bitterlin said the projected average attendance over a concert season is scheduled to be 9,000 to 10,000 on average, with three to seven sell-outs per year, depending on who is touring. Mr. Bethman said they could not predict from year to year which groups would be hot. The new facilities were being designed for multi-level attendance, and to make it a comfortable setting no matter what the size of the crowd was. Commissioner Thomas asked again about the traffic. Environmental Projects Manager Monaco introduced Bill Darnell, the traffic consultant. Bill Darnell with Darnell & Associates working with BRW on the traffic impact report for the project, replied that 20,000 people did not mean 20,000 cars. It would be in the range of about 6,000 cars with some spread out. The peak time was when people would be leaving the theater rather than coming in. They're spread out more when they're coming in before the performance. Commissioner Thomas questioned the 6,000 cars. He believed it would be more like 8,000. Mr. Darnell said the surveys indicated an average of 3.25 people per car for concerts. He said the City is looking at widening Otay Valley Road to basically six lanes from 805 to almost the curve. The recommendation in Phase II of the project was to carry the improvements around the curve to improve the bridge across the Otay River and into the project area. The width of the bridge was really the constraint. They want to operate the 50 foot wide bridge on a daily basis, so there would be one lane in each direction at all times, and then have a very wide median so that the median in the center could be used by coning or striping. When the event PC Minutes -7- July 19, 1995 was starting it could be coned off with three lanes into the facility. There would be three lanes going towards the freeway. From the raised median back, traffic would flow so that as people were coming into the concert, they would be able to maintain three lanes all the way into Otay Rio Road or into Spyglass. They could be maneuvered with control people and into the sims, depending on the parking lots that they were filling. Mr. Darnell said you do your best, get it open, and start refining it every time there is a concert or different event. Functions could be devised that are going on on-site that would keep some people staged there a little bit later, so traffic could be more spread out. With three lanes exiting from a pure capacity standpoint, about 2,000 cars an hour could exit in those lanes. Commissioner Thomas noted that for the Otay Valley Road, there were only two lanes from the bridge south. Mr. Darnell replied that from the bridge south, there would be the equivalent of five lanes. Commissioner Thomas noted Otay Valley Road had six lanes east to west, then going to the south. Mr. Darnell said that going to the south, south of the project were just the two lanes that were presently there. Staff felt very confident with the existing signals, controls that could be put in place, and the improvements with Otay Valley Road interchange. Brandywine and Orange could be used. The primary goal was to use Otay Valley Road to the interchange, and as part of the mitigation program, the applicant needed to work with the City, CalTrans and everyone else until there was a unified approach. Commissioner Salas, regarding air market operations on Thursday through Sundays, asked how many vendors typically would be using the market and how many shoppers there would be. Mr. Monaco said he thought the numbers assumed in the EIR was the worst-case scenario of 250 vendors and approximately 4,000 automobile trips. Commissioner Salas asked if all the concerts started at 8:00 or if some started earlier. Mr. Bitterlin replied that 90% of the concerts would be at 8:00, primarily because of the light conditions, but there could be earlier ones. Commissioner Salas was concerned that if there was a 6 o'clock closing time and all the vendors and customers were leaving the area, and people coming in to attend the concert, that might cause some congestion. Mr. Bitterlin said he had been in several meetings focusing on how that would work. MCA had faith in Kobey's present operation at the Sports Arena and their ability to exit when there is an event at the Sports Arena with an hour to break camp and get cleaned up. Mr. Bitterlin said that PC Minutes -8- July 19, 1995 MCA also had the ability to move them around on the site so that the lots which filled first would vacate first. Commissioner Salas pointed out that some concert attendees liked to make an event of it, arriving at the concert much earlier than start time. She asked if they had seen that happen at their amphitheaters. Mr. Bitterlin stated that it varied from act to act. There were some that had a natural tendency to bring a lot of general admission people that are going to sit on the lawn. They tend to arrive early because that's a first-come, first-serve situation. That was part of the operations plan. It would be considered at each concert--what they expect for general admission, when they expect people to arrive to start lining up, and it goes into their overall plan for that night's traffic control and patron control. Commissioner Salas stated that it might not be realistic for some concerts to have the traffic people there at 6 o'clock. Mr. Bitterlin said that was the most typical situation, and the one typically for a sell-out show, but it is not always that. The plan of attack of how they service the patrons and their vehicles would be adjusted as the concert demands. Commissioner Salas questioned whether MCA would be willing to rethink the hours of operation of the open air market if there was a consistent problem with the vendors and the shoppers trying to exit the area and the concert attendees coming in. Mr. Bitterlin said he couldn't speak to that particular issue relative to that operation. He didn't believe there would be a problem, because those very issues are being resolved on a very regular basis at the sports arena. Should it become a problem, they would have to sit down and anticipate either moving them to another location where it didn't impact MCA and allowing them to get their people in, or possibly an adjustment to the open air market hours of operation. Commissioner Ray asked staff what precipitated the shortened review period of the EIR. Mr. Monaco said that was as a result of a request from the applicant due to their scheduling requirements. Commissioner Ray asked what was unique about the scheduling requirements that would cause the requested short review period. Mr. Bitterlin replied that the goal was to finish the construction of the project and have a full concert season next year. Commissioner Ray stated he would like to see the technical appendices laid out better. It was extremely difficult to look through, and very difficult to relate the two documents. He asked PC Minutes -9- July 19, 1995 to see something that would mom closely align the draft with the technical appendices relative to ease of looking up the data and information. Additionally, on any of the sound maps and the topographical maps that show the dBA and the ranges of the dBA, he asked staff to include a specific overlay of Chula Vista's General Plan, San Diego's General Plan, and the City's proposed plans for the Otay Ranch, specifically Villages 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8. Chair Tuchscher noted that the public hearing was not finished, and called Kent Aden of the Baldwin Company to the microphone. Kent Aden, the Baldwin Company, 11975 El Camino Real, San Diego, said they were not opposed to an amphitheater in the City of Chula Vista. They thought it would be a benefit and would be a good amenity for the city. However, they had numerous concerns about the current proposal. The EIR failed to adequately address the noise impacts relative to the approved and planned development of the Otay Ranch. The noise study itself was faulty, and the conclusions were faulty. The EIR did not analyze whether the mitigation measures were adequate or feasible, and Baldwin had grave concerns about deferring them. They also had concerns related to the adequacy of the transportation analysis. Mr. Aden said the Baldwin Company remained extremely concerned with the proposed project and the adequacy of the EIR. They looked forward to receiving a response to their letter. Walter Fisher, Post Office Box 3666, Chula Vista, said he was in favor of the project. He favored this one over the amphitheater on the Bay because he did not think Coronado would cooperate regarding the noise that the amphitheater on the Bay would provide, and the people who own the lease on the R.V. park until 2021 had said they were not willing to give up their property in order to turn it over to an amphitheater. The concerns expressed by the City of San Diego were self-serving, and all cities in the County need projects like this and need to develop economically. He was disappointed that the Baldwin Company objected to this. The amphitheater looked like it was pointed into an area that would not build out for something like 10 to 15 years. San Diego's objection was also to their projects, which are future development. It had been stated in press reports that the amphitheater would actually generate less traffic and less problems and air pollution than an industrial facility which was originally planned for the site. He thought this would essentially give Chula Vista a drawing card that may not be seen for years on the Bayfront or anyplace else. MCA was a world class organization, an entertainment giant, that would draw people here. Local groups would be given a chance to make money off the facility by participating in the food service area. The problems could be mitigated. Regarding the road leading away to the south, in San Diego's General Plan it would eventually be a four-lane road going up to Heritage Road. He thought it was the best of the two proposals for the City and probably the best effort for any kind of drawing card in the immediate future. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Ray added that he would like to see the overlays for noise impact and traffic on ancillary streets; the impact on the Auto Park; specific responses to Baldwin's concerns; page 2 of the agenda package, item 3 on noise; page 3, item 4, air quality; and item 2. If these were PC Minutes -10- July 19, 1995 going to be mitigable in the future, he would like to see something in place that would address and maybe list alternatives for implementation of the mitigations up front versus the impact later. He suspected there would be more congestion before anything was done, and he wanted to see what some of those impacts were over time. If the build-out truly wouldn't be until 2010, it may not be important to implement those now. However, if Chula Vista wanted to develop the industrial uses there and Baldwin wanted to put the residential uses there, the impact would be sooner. He wanted to see that trade-off as well. There were some references in the draft itself that were approximate. Commissioner Ray asked to see some specifics regarding the numbers that were used for the modeling. He also asked Mr. Salomone, Director of Community Development, if there were any agreements in terms of widening of the streets. Community Development Director Salomone stated they were negotiating a development agreement with MCA and with Kobey's that would come back. They would be happy to share it with the Planning Commission at the August 9th meeting. It would be going to the City Council on August 22. Commissioner Ray said he would like to see a draft. Commissioner Willett asked staff if the Heritage Bridge was included in Phase III, and if the road was now in Phase II. Mr. Monaco concurred, and stated that Phase III of the road improvements was the improvements for the bridge itself and for the approaches to the bridge. Commissioner Willett asked if Phase III was scheduled for Year 2020 or if it was 2005? Mr. Monaco replied that that was the current phase. Currently, Phases II and III were being improved. So the bridge would be improved as a part of the existing contract being carried out now, probably 1996. Commissioner Willett said he supported Mr. Ray's comments on referring the document back to the technical appendices. He suggested that staff make a simple chart that could be put in the front of the book that references to the technical appendices sub chapter similar to a footnote in some technical reports, but up in front. He also recommended that in the final report, clarification of the MSCP map in the final report and the impact that would have on the project the way they've drawn the current line. Mr. Monaco replied that he understood the latest of the draft MSCP map showed the entire project area, which is all of the improved portion of the Phase I of the business park, as urbanized land. Staff would verify that and check those maps again. Commissioner Willett commented that there was another minor conflict between the focus planning area of the Otay Regional Valley Park in that the south edge of the project is considered as part of the greenbelt to be revegetated by the developer. It seemed that the project PC Minutes -11- July 19, 1995 would be a stumbling block in the Otay Regional Valley Park. There is a conflict between that map also. Mr. Monaco explained that there currently was a 40-ft. wide easement on the northern end of the property that was contemplated to be used as an active trail as a part of both the City of Chula Vista greenbelt and as a part of the Otay River Park. As far as the treatment on the south edge, staff hadn't received any direction or any ideas on how to incorporate that into the park. Staff had been working closely with the applicant on those issues. Commissioner Willett stated that Dennery Canyon and Robinhood Estates were designated as wildlife corridors which continue down to the western edge. Mr. Monaco said that in the meetings staff and the applicant had with Fish & Game and with Fish & Wildlife, it was suggested that southern area be used as a wildlife corridor. They didn't seem to feel that it had a lot of value as a corridor because of the terrain and the vegetation cover, but they did want to see that kept in open space to preserve the coastal sage scrub existing on that slope. That was a recommendation in the EIR. Commissioner Willett stated he was concerned with the response for the fire station. The EIR stated a 12-minute response time, which is 5 minutes above the standard. That would not come down until probably Year 2015 or when Baldwin puts in two fire stations. The station in San Diego area, Number 43, would not be open until 1998. He thought the EIR should respond that the developer have a fire suppression unit on hand, especially with the response of 12 minutes and the other one in excess of 7 minutes. Commissioner Salas said she would like to see a recommendation in the traffic mitigation measures. She recommended that MCA think about a shuttle system from public points of access; for example, from the various trolley lines. The shuttle system would do a lot to mitigate the traffic going in and out, if not a direct bus line from certain points to the event. Mr. Monaco commented that the Resource Conservation Commission was also concerned about that issue, and as a condition of their approval, they wanted to add that specific provision for remote parking and shuffle services, in addition to the City establishing a transit line from various transit nodes in the trolley stations within the City to the facility. Those would be added in the final EIR. Chair Tuchscher added that United Enterprises seemed absent from any comment or discussions, and he asked if staff had noticed them relative to this and other upcoming meetings? Mr. Monaco confirmed that they had been noticed along with all other property owners within 1,000 feet and, additionally for this project, staff had included the neighborhoods to the east of 805 and north of Otay Valley Road--all of those residential neighborhoods in that area south of Orange Avenue. Approximately 1,500 notices were sent out on each of the items for this EIR. PC Minutes -12- July 19, 1995 Chair Tuchscher agreed with Mr. Ray's comments relative to the maps and exhibits. He would like to see a General Plan map with those contours on it with approved projects, including the San Diego approved projects. He also asked that in the staff report, of the San Diego projects which ones had been subject to San Diego's imposed moratorium over the last seven years. And he also asked for an exhibit that showed the United Enterprises ownership as opposed to the Baldwin property ownership. MS (Ray/Willett) that the Planning Commission accept the draft EIR with the comments as noted, and direct staff to prepare the final EIR. Chair Tuchscher asked if staff could give a quick example of some precedent for providing for a shortened circulation period for the draft EIR document. Mr. Monaco said the last example in the City was for the Kaiser Hospital. That was done on a 30-day review period. Chair Tuchscher asked the basis for creating that type of situation when a circulation period is shortened. Mr. Monaco explained that it requires approval by the State Office of Planning and Research. When the City requested approval by that office, they asked City staff to make the request of all of the reviewing agencies at the State level. Approval was obtained from all those agencies, and the Office of Planning and Research did approve the City's request for the shortened review period. Commissioner Willett requested that verbiage be added explaining how that approval was obtained, the justification and reference to the appropriate rules. Mr. Monaco stated that staff could provide that and could quote the section in CEQA that provided for that. CEQA provides for a minimum 30-day review period. The typical is 45 days unless it requested for a shortened review. Con'unissioner Willett commented also that the allowances of CEQA should be expanded regarding the use of data from a prior EIR. He felt it should be explained in more depth. Chair Tuchscher suggested, since there were several new members on the Commission, that perhaps a CEQA workshop might be scheduled to go through those types of issues. VOTE: 6-0 PC Minutes -13- July 19, 1995 DIRECTOR'S REPORT Chair Tuchscher welcomed Patty Davis as the new Planning Commissioner, taking Commissioner Fuller's seat. Ms. Davis was to be sworn in the next Tuesday, and was in the audience. ITEM 2: UPDATE ON COUNCIL ITEMS Assistant Planning Director Lee had no update regarding Council items. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner Tarantino asked the procedures for reappointment to the Commission for a second term. Mr. Lee explained that if a Commissioner had served less than two years, he or she would be eligible for reappointment for two four-year terms. If more than two years, the Commissioner would only be eligible for reappointment for one four-year term. Staff would, however, confirm that with the City Clerk. Chair Tuchscher asked that a CEQA workshop be scheduled for sometime in the future. Mr. Lee said if the Commission did not have a workshop date or had a fairly light agenda, he would try to work with Joe Monaco and Doug Reid to have something prepared. Commissioner Willett noted that several of the Commissioners had pamphlets summarizing CEQA which had been obtained at a Commissioners conference. He asked that copies be made and given to the new Commissioners. Commissioner Salas volunteered to make hers available to be copied. ADJOURNMENT at 8:40 p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of July 26, 1995 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Nahcy l~ple~, ~ecret~y Planning Commission (m:\homc\planning\nancy\pc95 min\pc7-19,min)