Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1994/12/21 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Council Chambers 7:02 p.m. Public Services Building Wednesda¥~ December 21, 1994 276 Fourth Avenue~ Chula Vista CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Tuchscher, Commissioners Ray, Salas, and Tarantino COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioners Fuller and Martin (excused) (Commissioner Moot has been appointed to fill a vacancy on the City Council; therefore, the Commission has only six members as this time.) STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director Lee, Principal Planner Griffin, Associate Planner Martin, Assistant Planner Wolfe, Sr. Civil Engineer Ullrich, Contract Attorney Basil MOTION TO EXCUSE MSC (Ray/Tarantino) 4-0 to excuse Commissioner Fuller who was ill, and Commissioner Martin because of a business conflict. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSC (Ray/Salas) 4-0 (Commissioners Fuller and Martin excused) to approve the Planning Commission minutes of December 7, 1994. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Tuchscher led in the pledge of allegiance to the flag and a moment of silent prayer. PC Minutes -2- December 21, 1994 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: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-94-09: REQUEST TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE EXISTING APPROVAL FOR A PRIVATE SCHOOL FOR THREE YEARS (THROUGH SEPTEMBER 1999) AND TO ALLOW THE EXPANSION OF SAID SCHOOL FACILITIES INTO THE SECOND STORY OF THE BUILDING LOCATED AT 2400 FENTON STREET - Covenant Christian School Assistant Planning Director Lee asked for continuance of this item to January 11, 1995. Staff was still meeting with the applicant and the present permit did not expire until June 1996. MSC (Ray/Salas) 4-0 (Commissioners Fuller and Martin excused) to continue PCC-94-09 to the meeting of January 11, 1995. ITEM 2: PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-95-02: TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PARCEL R-15, CHULA VISTA TRACT 95-02, WITHIN THE EASTLAKE GREENS PLANNED COMMUNITY - Western Salt Company Communities The staff report was presented by Assistant Planner Wolfe. Commissioner Ray was confused as to the number of residential units shown in the Initial Study and the resolution, and asked if it was customary that in the resolution there would be something regarding the density transfer request. Ms. Wolfe stated that the Initial Study had been prepared for the amendment to the entire SPA. The information presented as part of that study had been further amended, and the actual number of lots approved for this particular parcel was 65, which was in compliance with the density. Commissioner Ray was concerned as to where the density would be transferred if this tentative subdivision map was approved. What would happen down the road? Ms. Wolfe stated that no density had been proposed, or transfer of density from this lot. The Environmental Review Coordinator had reviewed the most up-to-date information and had determined there were no further impacts. Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that on pages 2-30 and 2-31 of the Environmental Section of the staff report, the density was at 65, which was a decrease of 23 units. PC Minutes -3- December 21, 1994 Referring to a memo to the Environmental Review Coordinator included in the staff report, Commissioner Ray stated that the direction by the City Council included the consideration of any density transfers necessary to achieve the housing requirement. He did not see any response to that. Mr. Lee noted that the memo was dated February 1993, and since that time the transfer of density had actually been accomplished. It was a separate action taken by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Ray asked if in the future there could be some specific point of reference for density transfers and a timing when it would come back up. He did not recall a density transfer request for this specific site which had been approved by the Planning Commission. Mr. Lee stated there was a general map location included in the staff report which showed the areas where the density transfers occur. Planning Commission action had taken place several months before; he would reseamh the records and pull that action. Commissioner Ray asked that Mr. Lee contact him by phone with that information. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSC (Tarantino/Ray) 4-0 (Commissioners Fuller and Martin excused) to adopt Planning Commission Resolution PCS-95-02 recommending that the City Council approve the Tentative Subdivision Map in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the attached draft City Council resolution. ITEM 3: PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-95-16: REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AN UNMANNED CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON THE SITE OF THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT WATER TANK, LOCATED AT THE EASTERLY TERMINUS OF GOTHAM STREET -AirTouch Cellular Commissioner Tarantino asked Attorney Basil if he should dismiss himself; he lives on Marquette Road outside of the 500' area but in the neighborhood. Attorney Basil stated that if Mr. Tarantino could act fairly and objectively in the matter, it was outside of the 500' zone and he would not need to be excused. Commissioner Tarantino determined that he did not need to leave the dias. Associate Planner Miller presented the staff report, using overhead projection to show the location and the relationship to the nearest neighbors. The Environmental Review Coordinator had concluded that the project was a Class 3 categorical exemption from environmental review. Mr. Miller noted that a public forum had been held on November 9, 1994, for area residents. One resident who attended the public forum asked questions regarding visual impacts, placement on site, and access. The resident was encouraged to contact staff if she had further questions. PC Minutes -4- December 21, 1994 In addition, an extra set of the site plan and elevations and cross sections was given to the resident to share with the area neighbors. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution 95-16 recommending that the City Council approve the conditional use permit based on the draft City Council resolution and conditions and findings contained therein. Commissioner Ray asked if there was any concern over EMF with this project; if there was a power source. Mr. Miller stated there was a power source, and as with any electricity, there was EMF. Commissioner Ray asked if any study had been done to determine if there was any negative impacts concerning EMF. Mr. Miller said it was a brief issue with the facilities which had been installed off of I-5, but according to the information obtained at the time, it did not appear to be au issue. The applicant may be able to more adequately address that. Chair Tuchscher questioned whether the Baldwin Company had been notified. Mr. Miller answered affirmatively. Commissioner Salas, regarding the access road, asked if the road would continue to be gated. Mr. Miller said it would not. There was a recent action by City Council that would close the access. Gotham Street would end in a cul-de-sac, and this access would not exist. Primary access would be through Telegraph Canyon Estates through Otay Lakes Road. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Jeanne Wheeler, 2005 Gotham Street, Chula Vista 91913, said she had full sight of the building from the upper story view window in the front of her house, and from the front door there would be line of sight view of the building. She was against the project being built there. They lived in an area with CC&Rs which restrict any antennas on their homes. She realized there had been no conclusive evidence that microwave transmissions were harmful to public health, but if anytime in the next 10 years anyone in the immediate neighborhood developed any kind of strange cancer, the Commission would hear about it, and the legal people would hear about it. She did not believe cellular phone antennas should be in a residential area, and she did not believe they should have a visual impact on their home. She felt the property value would be decreased, and she was concerned about the health prospects. She showed the Commission a copy of Zoning News from 1991 suggesting that City Councils adopt regulations putting cellular telephone facilities on the same level as radio and television communications. Susan Lay, Director of Planning at SB&O Engineering, 3615 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 201, San Diego 92123, representing AirTouch Cellular stated that staff had placed numerous conditions on the permit which were not reflected in the sections and the plan view that the Commission saw. Staff had asked that the building be landscaped and that all of the antennas which were screenable inside a screen. The only antennas that would be visible above the building would be the whip antennas which are about 2-3" in diameter and approximately 10' high, which are typically painted to blend in with the surrounding areas. Regarding EMF, the facilities operate at about 50 watts, which is about the wattage of an ordinary light bulb, with PC Minutes -5- December 21, 1994 low power and high frequency. Ms. Lay stated that these were well below the minimums set out for cellular communications facilities and other kinds of electromagnetic facilities. Ms. Lay noted that Chula Vista is in the forefront of regulation of cellular facilities because conditions which require consideration of co-location are automatically applied to permits, which is a specific and direct attempt to assure that those facilities do not proliferate unduly. She encouraged Planning Commission support of the project. Kevin McGee, 5355 Mira Sorrento Place #500, S.D. 92121, representing AirTouch Cellular, had submitted a speaker's slip in favor, but did not speak, stating he was available to answer any questions. Mrs. Wheeler returned to the podium to ask if the facility would be enlarged at a later date. Mr. Miller replied that a condition was always added that the cellular companies cooperate with each other in co-locations. This is an effort by the City of Chula Vista to ensure that there is not a proliferation of the antennas. Chair Tuchscher asked if that was policy or ordinance. Mr. Miller stated it was developing into policy at this time; staff was looking at going to SANDAG with requests for joint usage. Ms. Lay stated that she believed the City's co-location requirements were such that if anyone were to wish to co-locate on the site, they also would be required to apply for a conditional use permit and go through a noticed public hearing process. It was not a matter of simply permitting the site to be loaded with antennas by anyone who wished to come along. They would have the same obligation for permit requirements and notification as AirTouch Cellular. The neighbors would be aware of any co-location attempts. Commissioner Tarantino asked what kind of additions would be allowed on that facility--whip antennas or more dishes. Any, if dishes, would they be on the 10' structure or the 18' structure? He asked if it was correct that they would be coming under the same conditions they were considering. Ms. Lay stated that it would depend upon what type of co-location was being suggested. Typically the problem with co-location with most of the cellular companies was that the operating standards that AirTouch had internally were such that they would have technical conflicts with others who wished to co-locate. She assumed they would probably try to use as much of the equipment building as possible, but they might come in with a request for an adjacent equipment building and more roof-mounted antennas. She did not believe they would need a monopole on the site because the height was such that they had a good line of sight already. Ms. Lay thought if a co-location request were to come forward, it would be similar to what AirTouch Cellular was proposing. Commissioner Tarantino asked if there would be another structure. Ms. Lay said there possibly would be. It depended on the company that wished to locate, what kind of service territory they PC Minutes -6- December 21, 1994 had; they may simply need to add another dish on the roof and share some of the AirTouch equipment. Commissioner Tarantino inquired as to the typical co-location addition. Michael Konig, Director of System Engineering, AirTouch Cellular, 5355 Mira Sorrento Place #500, S.D. 92121, stated that typically another cellular facility attempting to co-locate would have a completely independent building. If there were a structure, such as a monopole already there, there could be the possibility that the antennas could be mounted on the same structure. It was very uncommon for an equipment building to be shared. Other types of co- location which could take place would be paging, who may come in with their own building but co-locate the antennas on the AirTouch Cellular structure, assuming certain technical issues were resolved. Commissioner Ray asked if the maximum wattage would be 50 watts. The Santee mitigation measures stated that the antennas must be no more than 350 watts. It was helpful to him to know that the 50 wattage was well within that. He asked to see the overhead showing the slope on the northwest side of the site, and the location of Mrs. Wheeler's home. Mr. Miller stated Mrs. Wheeler's home would be one door to the west of the site of a future home. Mrs. Wheeler said that the set of plans that they had a copy of showed the elevation for her home at 600'. Their home was at 613'. Mr. Miller pointed out that from the houses to the property line was approximately 250', or maybe closer to 300' given the embankment and street right-of-way. Commissioner Ray asked if the home which was not yet existing on a level plane or on a higher elevation than Mrs. Wheeler's home. Mrs. Wheeler stated it was 4' higher. Chair Tuchscher, regarding locational issues, assumed there was a certain radius in which they would need to locate an antenna such as this, and asked what the radius was. Mr. Miller deferred to the applicant. Mr. Konig answered that for the coverage they were looking for along Telegraph Canyon and the community of EastLake, the radius of coverage was probably two to three miles. The radius of the search area was about one-half to three-fourths mile radius. Chair Tuchscher stated that they would need a one to one-and-one-half miles where they would need to locate the antennas, from a diameter standpoint. He assumed line of sight was critical. Mr. Konig said that for the coverage they were looking for, it was critical. Chair Tuchscher asked how many alternative sites there were. Mr. Konig replied that they had identified about one-half dozen, none of which work. Regarding alternatives, Mr. Konig said the high school was too low; they would have to mount a 75' to 100' monopole. In the commercial area just east and north of the present location, one landowner would not deal with PC Minutes -7- December 21, 1994 them. A plot construction would have required a monopole in the area of 75' to 100' because the terrain was slightly lower to the north and to the east. Commissioner Ray asked if anything in the Otay Ranch in the mesa would have worked, or if it was analyzed. Mr. Konig did not recall anything in that area. Mr. Miller stated nothing had been looked at in that area by staff for this project. Associate Planner Miller showed a slide, which had been taken from the approximate area where the facility would be, which showed the Wheeler home. Commissioner Ray asked if the monopole would be visible above the screen. Ms. Lay answered that there was no monopole. Only the whip antennas would be seen above the screen. Ms. Lay showed the Commissioners some photographs the applicant had taken from Gotham Street approximately where the new homes would be located, which would give at least a portion of the view that Mrs. Wheeler has. Commissioner Tarantino asked how many buildings could theoretically be built on the site. Chair Tuchscher said they would have to go before the Planning Commission and it would be a discretionary approval. He asked how much land was there. Ms. Lay said it was a combination of factors--how willing would the water district be to negotiate lease areas with additional tenants; how much of the technical requirements could be mediated between the number of potential users wanting to locate on the site; and what is the City of Chula Vista willing to approve. She did not want the Planning Commissioners to be overly concerned that there would be a proliferation of buildings on the hill. She felt it was unlikely. Mr. Miller showed the approximately location of the cellular facility and pointed out the areas that would be available, which was a small area, and other reasons for not locating additional antennas in the area. Commissioner Salas asked if the applicant would landscape only the area around the planned building, or if they would landscape around the water tower as well. Mr. Miller replied that it was staff's intent that both areas be landscaped, and within the right- of-way, assuming the water authority allowed that. It was a concern to staff that it be shielded and that it blend in, to the extent possible, from the neighboring areas. They would have to concentrate towards the north in getting adequate landscaping in that area. PC Minutes -8- December 21, 1994 Commissioner Salas asked if it was staff's opinion that it would block most of the water tower or soften it. Mr. Miller said it would soften the cellular facility. It was not intended for the water tank itself. Commissioner Salas questioned whether the landscaping would include some of the right-of-way. Mr. Miller confirmed that it would, if the water authority allowed it. It was a condition of approval and would have to be worked out. Ms. Lay added that the only area they had any control over was their lease area within the fencing, and they would have to work with staff to determine the precise nature of whatever landscaping staff had in mind. The water authority was fairly strict about what could go on their easement. Ms. Lay thought, at best, they would be able to place a few shrubs there. Until staff saw the landscaping plan, they could not guarantee the Commission that other areas of the site beyond their lease area was within their control. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MS (Ray/Salas) to approve Conditional Use Permit PCC-95-16, a request to construct an unmanned cellular communications facility on the site of the Otay Water District water tank located at the easterly terminus of Gotham Street by AirTouch Cellular. Commissioner Ray said it was difficult for him to see the canyons being developed. He would be reluctant to look into the future and see what kind of technology and structures would be there to support it. In light of that, he shared Mrs. Wheeler's concern. He did not believe she would see the same facility there in the next five to 10 years. He did not believe she would see the antennas; they would bring them down and use some other system. He did not see this technology lasting that much longer. He would vote for this, because the public demand for the service was there, and therefore the City would need to help promote business with the least amount of affect on the constituency of the City. Chair Tuchscher said that unfortunately antennas were a reality and there would be more of this as cellular technology usage goes up, especially in the eastern areas. The Commission had to deal with certain constraints within the needs of putting a service like this forth. It was not easy from a public perspective, although the cellular companies do a better job than most to screen. He hoped there was some significant landscaping to satisfy not only the existing neighbors but the future residents of the new homes in Telegraph Canyon Estates. He would support the motion. Commissioner Tarantino said his primary concern was the proliferation of buildings on the mountain top. He thought the applicant had done a good job in just having the whip antennas extend above the 18' building. He thought most of the equipment would be enclosed or shielded by landscaping. He would also vote for the project based on that and the belief that both City staff and the applicant had done their best to assure that the quality of life was preserved in the area. PC Minutes -9- December 21, 1994 VOTE: 4-0 (Commissioners Fuller and Martin excused) Commissioner Ray asked how long staff would envision an ordinance being developed to cover this type of facility. Principal Planner Griffin stated that in this particular case, they were attempting to work on a regional basis. He thought it was a regional issue and a regional concern. Staff had asked SANDAG to look at it in that form so that they might act as a conduit for all the communities to form a task force to get together with the cellular people and others who have been licensed for communications in the region and prepare some kind of long-term strategy and regional strategy, so it would be a coordinated approach. He could not answer as to timing. He hoped it would be within the year. Commissioner Ray was concerned that although this applicant or future applicants may do their best to shield it, there were still neighborhoods that would be impacted or locales that would be impacted. He thought the Commission would continue to see more as the eastern territory is developed. He would feel better if he was armed with an ordinance or something concrete that he could fall back on as opposed to a wish list. Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that this particular item would proceed on to the City Council for a final decision, and the neighbors would be receiving notice. He thought it would be set for hearing sometime in the middle to latter part of January. Chair Tuchscher thanked Mrs. Wheeler for her time and effort. The information she presented was excellent and provoked thought. Hopefully, they could move things forward in a way that was as innocuous as possible for her relative to this project, and also for other City issues and decisions the Commission would have to make in the future. Ms. Lay asked for clarification that it would go to Council. She believed the Planning Commission made the final determination unless an appeal was filed. Mrs. Wheeler stated she would appeal, if it needed to be filed. Ms. Lay stated she would call Mr. Lee the following morning to make sure she had the correct Code section. ITEM 4: PUBLIC HEARING: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-95-12: REQUEST TO EXPAND THE EXISTING CIVIC CENTER PARKING LOT AT 459 F STREET IN THE R-3 (APARTMENT RESIDENTIAL) ZONE -City of Chula Vista Principal Planner Griffin made the staff presentation, noting that the Town Centre Project Area Committee had recommended approval. Staffalso recommended approval, based on the findings in the staff report. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. PC Minutes -10- December 21, 1994 Larry T. Powell, 438 Camino Del Rio South #203, San Diego 92108, representing the owner of 465 "F" Street, was neither for or against the property but favored the first phase of the project. He was concerned about the fence dividing the property, and requested a 6' tall, masonry fence to preserve privacy. He was also concerned about security and requested that the additional parking area be permit parking with fencing as it now existed. Regarding lighting, he believed the City ordinances would protect the neighbors from lighting that would shine in existing apartment windows, and that cleaning equipment would not frequent the lot before 7:30 a.m. or after 8:00 p.m. He suggested that the existing structure at 459 "F" Street be lighted if it is razed to prevent security problems. He looked forward to a good neighbor policy and expansion of the existing lot. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Ray asked for clarification as to whether this was approval of the parking structure. Mr. Griffin stated it was only approval of the surface lot. Commissioner Salas asked what type of fencing would divide the property. Mr. Griffin was not sure if that had been decided. He thought Mr. Powell's ideas were good, and if the Connnission thought they were appropriate, he would forward a recommendation that it be a solid masonry fence along that side. Commissioner Salas thought it was a reasonable request and would like to forward that recommendation. Principal Plalmer Griffin noted that it may be subject to change, along with landscaping, because of fiscal constraints. He stated that the parking would be by permit, and it would remain gated in the evening to maintain security. Chair Tuchscher was pleased to hear it would be permit parking, but noted that more open parking on the campus was needed, since it always seemed to be a challenge. Regarding the fence, he asked staff about the procedure to make a recommendation. Assistant Planning Director Lee stated that typically this type of expansion was handled at Zoning Administrator level as opposed to Design Review Committee. A zoning wall is required between commemial and residential properties. There is no requirement for a zoning wall with masonry. He went on to explain the procedure used. Chair Tuchscher asked if in circumstances where public or quasi-public type use next to some other land use, it was on a case-by-case basis. Mr. Lee concurred. He cautioned that the City would have to be the responsible party in maintenance of the fence, whether it were a fence or a wall. He did not see a maintenance issue. He asked for Mr. Powell's card so they could talk with him directly about some of the issues he brought up. Chair Tuchscher thought Mr. Powell raised some very relative issues, which everyone is concerned about; however, he thought the cost associated with a masonry block wall may be PC Minutes - 11- December 21, 1994 prohibitive. There may be some other effective, as well as cost effective, solutions that may satisfy Mr. Powell. Mr. Powell stated that they were more concerned with a solid fence and, unless the City put one up, the owner would be forced to. Chair Tuchscher thought the solid fence would be a proper visual barrier. Mr. Powell asked how he could be notified when a decision was made regarding the fence. Mr. Lee again suggested that Mr. Powell leave his address or phone number. Staff would contact him to set up a time to go through all the issues before it moved on to the City Council. Mr. Powell asked if there was an existing timeframe for razing the existing building and creating the lot. Chair Tuchscher suggested he ask staff when he was contacted. He was not sure staff was into that stage at the present time. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSC (Salas/Ray) 4-0 (Commissioners Fuller and Martin excused) to adopt Resolution PCC- 95-12 recommending that the City Council grant a conditional use permit to expand the existing Civic Center parking lot at 459 "F" Street and R-3 Apartment Residential Zone. ITEM 5: PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-95-06: CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSAL TO ESTABLISH A HIGH TECH/BIO TECH ZONE; CREATE A CITY COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE TO GOVERN CERTAIN MATTERS WITHIN THE HIGH TECH/BIO TECH ZONE OF THE CITY; AMEND THE EASTLAKE PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS - City Initiated Assistant Planner Wolfe and Community Development Manager Dye presented the historical background on the processing of the project, as well as on the high tech/bio tech industry. Ms. Wolfe stated that the project was intended to officially implement project processing streamlining measures that would encourage the location of high tech/bio tech businesses in the City. The City Council at a meeting on May 24, 1994, conceptually approved the proposed streamlining program. The City Council conceptually endorsed the establishment of a high tech/bio tech incentive zone in the territory of EastLake Business Center and the inclusion of Phase I and Phase II of the Business Center within that zone. Commissioner Salas noted that in economic development circles, Cheryl Dye was highly regarded. She commended Ms. Dye for the work she had done. Commissioner Salas felt a very important component of bringing Chula Vista to the forefront was to make sure this program was successful. She asked if there would be any particular emphasis on attracting the high tech versus the bio tech. How would it be integrated, and would it be more beneficial to work on one rather than the other? PC Minutes -12- December 21, 1994 Ms. Dye said that at this point there had not been specific eligibility criteria established. There were general descriptions and definitions as to what high tech, bio med, and bio tech encompassed and the idea was simply to market the program to the business community to attract these types of companies to Chula Vista and to this zone in particular. There was potential for making available incentives, including not only fast tracking, but also quantifiable financial incentives. Staff would make recommendations on a case-by-case basis in terms of specific incentives. Commissioner Salas asked if waivers of development fees and licensing fees would be included. Ms. Dye replied that they were talking about an innovative type of agreement that would provide for a partnership between the City and the applicant to enable the City to offer a possible discount on land, the payment of fees, etc. They were also looking for federal funds to be used as collateral for loans without any out-of-pocket money from the City. Commissioner Salas questioned the size of the largest company that could be attracted to the area. Ms. Dye stated that in Phase I there remained 35 undeveloped acres. In Phase II, envisioned to be part of the zone, there was a net of 100 acres. There was an opportunity for an extremely large company to come in. Commissioner Salas asked what a semi conductor was and if it would be suitable for this type of site. Ms. Dye said a semi conductor manufacturer would be considered an electronics high tech company and could be qualified to come into the zone, as far as land use. Commissioner Salas stated she thought it was an exciting idea. She had a concern, however, with the establishment of a subcommittee. She was concerned about two Councilmembers being able to meet with an applicant to a project, discussing the details and perhaps working out the details of a plan. She was concerned them would be a violation of the Brown Act, and with the details being discussed outside a public hearing. Chair Tuchscher asked the City Attorney to comment on the City policy in relation to any development, rather than just the subcommittee--the approachability of applicants to access public officials, etc. Attorney Basil answered that the subcommittee would be a unique situation. For a City Councilmember or Commissioner to discuss a project with the applicant, in terms of standards it would be typically appropriate. Where that type of discussion reaches a level where the Commissioner or Councilmember is indicating how they might vote and then receiving input or argument on the issue raises the necessity for the Councilmember or Commissioner to bring the contents of the discussion to the public body at a public hearing so that all parties have the same due process and are aware of what is going on. The subcommittee would be unique not only applying standards with the support of staff, but it would be a hearing body as well. Because of that, the members of the subcommittee would have to wear two hats. When discussing issues as to whether the matter would be passed and conditions, those matters would have to take place in public hearings. There were provisions for that. PC Minutes -13- December 21, 1994 Chair Tuchscher noted the Bayfront Subcommittee as an example and how it worked. He added that Escondido had a similar subcommittee. Ms. Dye confirmed. Ms. Dye noted that this was discussed in the staff report, and stated that the subcommittee would be subject to the Brown Act. She thought part of the intent was to limit the number of review bodies that the applicant would go through. It was also a message that the City of Chula Vista wanted to be business friendly and wanted to roll out the red carpet for that particular incentive zone. The subcommittee would act as a recommending body to the Council on certain applications. Chair Tuchscher stated that he had been involved in this particular concept and they had learned early on through research into the industries' needs that reliability, predictability, and time sensitivity in project processing is essential. Regarding the existing process, specific zones and specific uses become redundant. He thought this was the most important element to the plan because it provides reliability, predictability, time sensitivity, and marketability. Chair Tuchscher felt it sent a message that would put Chula Vista on the map in those industries in California. It is unique, aggressive, and taking advantage of everything Chula Vista had to offer, being large enough to have resources, yet small enough to be nimble and adjust to today's markets. Commissioner Ray, referring to page 5-25, Section 3, paragraph A of the staff report, asked if they limited the power of the subcommittee to the EastLake Subdivision physically. Ms. Wolfe replied that it did at this time. Commissioner Ray stated he had no problem with delegating authority given to the Commission to the elected officials who should be running the City and making the decisions for the City. He was concerned that it was unknown when this would be out; it was potentially a predecessor to other subcommittees being formed for the BECA-type industries, Otay Ranch, etc. He was concerned that the Planning Commission might be circumvented. Before voting on the proposal, he recommended that the Planning Commission Chairman be a member of the subcommittee, or have a sunset clause. Assistant Planning Director Lee, referring to the Escondido subcommittee, said he understood Escondido had two Councilmembers operating as a subcommittee. Several projects had gone through that subcommittee without incident, and there were no concerns expressed by the public on the designs that were approved. Staff was comfortable that there was a reasonable process with the public hearings and design standards. Mr. Lee said it was important to get the message out to the business community that the City wanted to work with them and were offering incentives. Mr. Lee said it could be reported back to the Planning Commission as to Council action on those items. The EastLake area could be looked at as a trial, and if issues started to develop and the Commission was concerned, they could send that message forward to the City Council. He thought the idea of having a Commissioner on the subcommittee was not significant from a staff perspective, but it was one more member. Staff was comfortable as it was written. However, the Commission could recommend that a member sit on the subcommittee. PC Minutes -14- December 21, 1994 This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. No one wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Tarantino thought there were many safeguards built into the process, and all the meetings would be noticed and held in the open. He suggested that the Planning Commissioners might received a notice as to when the meetings would be held, and any Commissioner might attend as part of the audience. Councilmembers would be working with staff and he did not see a problem with it. If it took something radical to attract businesses to the area, he thought it should be done. Chair Tuchscher recommended voting on the issue before the Commission and then possibly vote on the issue of a Planning Commission member on the subcommittee. Assistant Planner Wolfe pointed out that as part of the amendments being proposed, the high tech/bio tech uses would be permitted by right. As such, discretionary actions relating to conditional use permit issuance that may have been brought forward to the Planning Commission for consideration would no longer be necessary. In terms of the Design Review Committee, the Zoning Ordinance had been recently amended to allow development of certain size commercial and industrial uses within a planned community districts to be processed at the staff level. In staff's opinion, the actions the subcommittee would be taking would be for the most part relating to economic incentives rather than design review or Planning Commission items, although there may be some exceptions. Commissioner Salas said that made her feel a little more comfortable. She understood the importance of being aggressive and able to market the community in order to get a company to come into the community. Her concern was that the system of checks and balances could not be given away for the end result of drawing in a company. There had to be a limit as to how far the City would go. She was comfortable with the proposed changes. For the record, it had to be known that because the Planning Commission was approving this kind of subcommittee, it did not mean they would have to approve something like this in the future. Chair Tuchscher noted that the geographic scope of this project was limited. On a City-wide basis, it would have been a huge issue. On a project like EastLake, with design regulations and a very attentive owner, it would be manageable. Mr. Tuchscher did not feel the need for a Planning Commissioner sitting on the subcommittee. He felt this item needed to be moved forward and encouraged the Commissioners to vote favorably. Commissioner Salas asked how difficult or easy it would be to have a variance in the requirements as to the type of business. Ms. Wolfe answered that uses such as schools and daycare centers would be handled through the conditional use permit. Those uses would still need to go through review and would have to be approved by the Planning Commission and City Council, if necessary. It would not be the high tech/bio tech zones that would be required to comply with certain criteria. PC Minutes -15- December 21, 1994 Ms. Dye stated that if a use was not a high tech or bio tech use as defined, it would not be taken to the Council subcommittee. It would not qualify as a high tech or bio tech use for special treatment. It would still go forward to the Planning Commission for approval as a CUP. Chair Tuchscher noted that all the underlying land uses and processes would stay in place, unless a company fit the criteria, in which case it would go to the separate new process. Ms. Dye stated that with this process, the applicant would clearly know if they could go into the zone. Language is not being taken away from what was already there; in some cases, it is being clarified or added to allow for these uses. Commissioner Ray said that he supported the philosophy; his primary concern was that today the City had the Council and Planning Commission to provide the checks and balances that Commissioner Salas mentioned. If this is approved, the Planning Commission would be setting the precedence that any time one of the special subcommittees wished to be set up for a special zone, there was nothing to prevent them from doing that. If there was no connection to the subcommittee to report back to the Planning Commission, he felt it would become more prolific throughout the City as it expands. He was concerned that a future Planning Commission may be confused as to what was happening. He was not opposed to the subcommittee being set up; he felt someone from the Commission should be part of it. Motion by Commissioner Tarantino to adopt Resolution PCM-95-06 recommending that the City Council approve the high tech/bio tech proposals in accordance with the attached draft City Council ordinances based on the findings contained therein. Commissioner Ray asked if that included the Planning Commission member sitting on the subcommittee. Commissioner Tarantino said it did not. He did not feel there should be a Planning Commissioner sitting on the subcommittee. It was another schedule to have to balance. Chair Tuchscher seconded the motion for discussion purposes. He asked all the Commissioners if they had their positions established. Assistant Planning Director Lee stated that if the only concern by Mr. Ray related to having a Commissioner sitting on the subcommittee, he could offer an amendment to the motion. If the amendment failed, at least the information would go forward to the Council, and the main motion to set the ordinance in place would be intact except for that particular aspect. Answering Commissioner Ray, Mr. Lee stated that a unanimous vote was needed to pass. It would move forward to Council regardless, but in terms of positive recommendation, it would take four votes. PC Minutes -16- December 21, 1994 Chair Tuchscher asked if a workshop on high tech/bio tech was still scheduled. Mr. Lee stated it was scheduled for January 18. Answering Chair Tuchscher, Ms. Wolfe said the tentative date for the item to go to Council was January 24. Chair Tuchscher asked if the Commissioners could reconsider at that time after gaining further information at the workshop. Mr. Lee replied that the 18th could be scheduled as a special meeting rather than a workshop. The item could be continued to the 18th with a full presentation by Ms. Dye, or have the workshop and the item be set for the Planning Commission's next regularly scheduled meeting. In that case it would not go to Council until mid-February. Commissioner Ray stated he would go ahead and vote for the proposal because it was good to create something to streamline the process to bring more industry and more revenue into the City. If there were other concerns, there needed to be subsequent motions. VOTE: 4-0 in favor (Commissioners Martin and Fuller excused). Motion by Colnmissioner Ray to recommend to include the Chairman of the Planning Commission to sit as part of the subcommittee to go over the certain matters for the high tech/bio tech zone of the City. The motion died for lack of a second. Chair Tuchscher thanked the Commission who had worked to a consensus, and to Cheryl Dye who had made a big difference in the City. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Assistant Planning Director Lee updated the Commissioners on Council items, noting that the Council had denied the appeal on the Salvation Army which had been filed by the adjacent property owner, and upheld the Planning Commission's decision on the item, in addition to approving the 109-unit EastLake Subdivision project, which had also been recommended by the Planning Commissioners. Regarding a question by Commissioner Ray at a previous meeting, the Interim 125 facility, Mr. Lee said it was planned as a two-lane facility. He thought it would be worthwhile for the Commission to schedule a workshop on the subject. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner Salas had attended a seminar recently regarding new urbanism, and stated that she was interested in the concept of "skinny roads." She asked if any developers of the new projects coming forth or if the City was agreeable to the "skinny road" concept. Mr. Lee explained to the Commissioners the concept, and noted that the City was going to have a PC Minutes -17- December 21, 1994 separate issue paper which would be discussed at committee level as it related to Otay Ranch and other areas. Chair Tuchscher mentioned that he had spoken with Councilman Moore regarding requiring sidewalks in industrial areas, and the fact that they are not often used. The thought had occurred that maybe certain areas should be considered for future development where the streets, curbs and gutters are installed, but sidewalks am not required. From an economic standpoint, it would lower the overall cost for development and land cost, and perhaps would become a better place for businesses to locate. Assistant Planning Director Lee stated that the City was trying to make all areas more pedestrian friendly, and he thought that would include industrial areas. The areas where there is no need for a sidewalk could be evaluated, but not simply eliminated. ADJOURNMENT at 9:15 p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of Wednesday, January 11, 1994, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Nancy R~pley, Secretar~ Planning Commission (m:\homc\planning\nancy\pc94min\ 12 21-94.min)