Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1993/01/13 MINUTES OF A REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Council Chambers 7:05 p.m. Public Services Building Wednesday, January 13, 1993 276 Fourth Avenue. Chula Vista ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Fuller, Commissioners Carson, Martin (arrived 7:15 p.m.), Moot, Ray (arrived 7:30 p.m.),' and Tarantino COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Commissioner Tuchscher STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director Lee, Principal Planner Howard, Associate Planner Batchelder, Environmental Coordinator Miller, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chair Fuller, followed by a moment of silent prayer. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Chair Fuller dispensed with review of the composition of the Planning Commission, its responsibilities and the format of the meeting. MSUC (Carson/Tarantino) to excuse Commissioners Tuchscher, Martin, and Ray. MOTION RESCINDED AND RESTATED: MSUC (Carson/Tarantino) 4-0 to excuse Commissioner Tuchscher who had been delayed out of town on a business matter. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Carson/Tarantino) 4-0 to accept the minutes of November 12, 1992, as submitted. MSUC (Carson/Moot) 4-0 to accept the minutes of December 2, 1992, as submitted. PC Minutes -2- January 13, 1993 MSUC (Carson/Tarantino) 4-0 to accept the minutes of December 16, 1992, as submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None ITEM 1. PUBLIC HEARING: A. GPA-92-02 ENTERTAINING RECONSIDERATION OF CITY- INITIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN PREVIOUSLY ADOPTED IN JUNE 1992, WHICH IMPLEMENT AND SUPPLEMENT THE APPROVED COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO HAZARDOUS WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN (continued from December 16, 1992) B. GPA-92-02A - CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL CITY-INITIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE PUBLIC FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN REFINING PORTIONS OF THE JUNE 1992 AMENDMENTS, AND RESTATING THE CITY'S "FAIR SHARE" CONCEPTS REGARDING HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES (continued from December 16, 1992) C. PCA-92-02 - CONSIDERATION OF CITY-INITIATED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 19 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES AS CONDITIONAL USES IN THE CITY'S INDUSTRIAL ZONES, AND TO ESTABLISH A SPECIFIC REVIEW PROCEDURE FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR SUCH FACILITIES CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW (continued from December 16, 1992) Associate Planner Batchelder gave the staff report and recommended, based on the responses provided in Attachment 1 to the staff report, and through prior responses, that the reconsideration of the previously adopted amendments be denied, the Negative Declaration be adopted, the Planning Commission resolution adopted recommending that the City Council approve the amendments contained in Exhibit B of the staff report, and recommending that the City Council adopt the implementing ordinance amendments contained in Exhibit C of the staff report. Commissioner Tarantino questioned whether references to the "Chula Vista City School District" should be changed to "Chula Vista Elementary School District" in the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan. Mr. Batchelder answered that the language was outside the context of the proposed amendments, and would need to be handled under another amendment. Chair Fuller thought it may be handled administratively; however, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf felt it was more than just housekeeping revisions and should be made as part of the next General Plan amendment. PC Minutes -3- January 13, 1993 Regarding the LAC, Commissioner Tarantino asked if the LAC was for each project or if the environmental and public interest members change and City representatives remain the same. Mr. Batchelder said the LAC was a project specific group to be appointed and then disbanded after each project had gone through the approval process. Commissioner Tarantino, regarding the fair share policy, page 3-59, found Exhibits A and Exhibit B confusing. Mr. Batchelder explained that Exhibit A referred to the amendments previously adopted in June 1992, and was included for reference, and that Exhibit B reflected the amendments currently being proposed. He said Exhibit B was the final document. Commissioner Moot, referring to the Ogden lawsuit, asked if the City challenging it was the City of San Diego. Mr. Batchelder answered affirmatively, and added the last communication received from them was a January 4, 1993, letter indicating reservation of their option to comment further in conjunction with the City Council's consideration of the amendments. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Commissioner Moot asked if the attorney for Latham & Watkins had contacted staff indicating if they were to be in attendance. Mr. Batchelder answered negatively. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Martin/Carson) 6-0 (Commissioner Tuehseher excused) to deny reconsideration of Resolution GPA-92-02. MSUC (Carson/Martin) 6-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher excused) to adopt the Negative Declaration prepared under IS-93-14 and further recommend that the City Council adopt the Negative Declaration prepared under IS-93-14. MS (Carson/Martin) to recommend that the City Council approve the draft City Council resolution approving the General Plan Amendment currently proposed under GPA-92-02A, contained in Exhibit B, and further recommend that City Council introduce for first reading the attached draft City Council ordinance hnplementing the amenthnents to zoning ordinance as contained in Exhibit C. Commissioner Ray was concerned with the statement in the resolution stating that the public hearing would be set by the Planning Commission. He questioned the Planning Commission setting the time and date of the public hearings. Assistant City Attorney said he believed it was boiler plate language and that the Environmental Coordinator closed the public review period on the EIR and the Director of Planning actually set the public hearing date. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf asked if the Commissioners would approve the resolution with the potential correction by staff to conform with the actual party to set the time and place of the public hearing. The maker agreed. PC Minutes -4- January 13, 1993 Commissioner Moot, referring to the recommendation setting the conditional use permits, said the Ogden case challenged the City of San Diego's criteria. Associate Planner Batchelder said the challenge was that the City of San Diego did not have any adopted procedures for the review of hazardous waste facilities, and yet was attempting to impose conditions and procedures in absence of regulation. In this instance, the City of Chula Vista is attempting to establish a process to be used to review such facilities. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf concurred, and stated the purpose of Chula Vista's ordinance was to establish processing requirements, and the criteria to grant or deny. VOTE: 6-0 OTHER BUSINESS · APPOINTMENT OF PLANNING COMMISSION REPRESENTATIVE TO GROWTH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT COMMISSION MSUC (Fuller/Moot) 5-0-1 (Martin abstained) to appoint Coroanissloner Martin to the Growth Management Oversight Connnission. · DISCUSSION OF CHULA VISTA GREENBELT Principal Planner Howard gave a presentation describing the greenbelt and the different areas of the greenbelt and some of the issues involved. Commissioner Ray asked the setback off the marsh area (midbayfront)--the buffer zone. Assistant Planning Director 12.e said there was a 100' wide buffer that was not accessible to the public, but there is an area interfacing on the north which is a public park which flows into the residential area which is still park acreage as it wraps around to the north heading east. Commissioner Ray was concerned about the area immediately abutting the bay, the far western piece immediately east of the buffer zone, and where the fence would be located. He asked if that would be accessible to the general public. Mr. Lee said that would be accessible; the fence would be adjacent to the marsh. Commissioner Martin was concerned that the greenbelt be held intact and said he would be sensitive to the location of the greenbelt to keep it intact during the building of new projects. He wanted to reinforce to staff the Planning Commission's concern about the maintenance of the greenbelt so applicants would not come in the future and build in the area. Mr. Lee said all plans which had been brought up to date were consistent with the General Plan and the limits of the greenbelt as depicted on the map. PC Minutes -5- January 13, 1993 Chair Fuller noted that the planning done on the auto park in the Otay area allows that portion of the greenbelt to be more accessible. Chair Fuller asked staff to indicate the location of the university site. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Assistant Planning Director Lee stated that the information had been received for the Planners Conference and noted that there was enough budget for two Commissioners to attend, possibly three. He distributed the brochures and gave them information regarding flights, etc. He asked the Commissioners to review it and get back to staff. Commissioner Moot said that because of his schedule, he would be willing to be third and let the others go. Mr. Lee distributed an updated schedule of meetings and asked that the March 10 meeting be canceled because of the Conference and that a meeting be held on March 3 instead. Regarding Joe Casillas' position on the Housing Advisory Commission, Mr. Lee said that Joe was still serving. Regarding the water offset program, Mr. Lee had talked to Barbara Bamberger who had been working on the water retrofit program which was drafted up and presented in draft form to the City Council. There had been significant opposition by the Realty Board, and Mr. Lee was not sure of the next step. Barbara Bamberger had been tentatively scheduled for the March workshop. Mr. Lee reminded the Commissioners of the January 27 joint meeting with the County of San Diego with a Planning Commission meeting to follow. Again, on February 17, there would be a joint meeting with a break between. Chair Fuller asked about the retrofit ordinance, if it was the first reading of the ordinance. Mr. Lee said it had been pulled from the Council agenda, and there were many issues. COMMISSION COMMENTS Chair Fuller asked about the letter the Commissioners received from Mr. Harter and what he was referring to. Mr. Lee said that Mr. Harter had applied for a subdivision map through the City. Staff had attempted to work with him but had had several disagreements, and had held a joint meeting with the Deputy City Manager. City staff had asked Mr. Harter to refile if he wished to proceed with his project. After several letters to Mr. Harter and no contact from him during the year, a letter was sent to him closing out the account which resulted in the letter to the Commission. Another meeting was held with Mr. Harter and he was advised that he needed to file with the City a filing fee and proceed. Mr. Lee was not aware of Mr. Harter's decision. PC Minutes -6- January 13, 1993 Chair Fuller said that Commissioner Tuchscher had asked that an item be added to the next agenda re the university siting. He felt more discussion was needed on the university siting because of the ramifications of the current site and the lack of information the Commission had. He felt the County Planning Commission would be looking to the City for more direction in matters which would affect Chula Vista. Chair Fuller suggested that possibly a workshop or some setting where members of the Blue Ribbon Committee or university siting committee could attend. It was agreeable with the other Commissioners. Commissioner Carson felt the County Commissioners thought it was a dead issue. She needed input on that. Chair Fuller felt the County Commissioners were not interested, rather than it being a dead issue. They needed to know if that was a viable location. Assistant Planning Director Lee thought the apprehension on the part of the County was that they felt a site of 400 acres and 300 acres of it had a lot of environmental constraints, this was not a real site, and that it did not meet anyone's criteria. Commissioner Martin requested, if a workshop was held, a definition of a university site--do they need office space, low income housing, land, parking ratio per ratio of student per hundred, or was it a bargaining chip? Commissioner Ray commented that any site picked would not be suitable because none would be large enough. Chair Fuller felt the Blue Ribbon Committee would have some of those answers. Commissioner Martin felt this was the time for a university to come in. They could design the type of housing they wanted, the type of roads, etc. He believed the village could be designed with the university in mind rather than wait until after the fact. Assistant Planning Director Lee noted that the time to discuss those issues or questions regarding the western region was at the Otay Ranch meetings. He noted that a Housing Advisory meeting would be held also, if any of the Commissioners were interested. ADJOURNMENT at 8:25 p.m. to the Joint Planning Commission/County Commission Special Meeting of January 15, 1993 at 3:30 p.m. at the County Department of Planning and Land Use Room; and to the Joint Planning Commission/County Commission Special Meeting of January 27, 1993 at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, followed by a Regular Business Meeting of the Chula Vista Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Nancy Ri~ley, Sec~tary Planning Commission