Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1979/05/08 Item 06, 06aCITY OF CHULA VISTA Item No. 6,6a COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMEiVT For meeting of 5/8/79 Public hearing - Consideration of omnibus amendment to the Chula Vista ITEM TITLE General Plan Resolution ~'~,5'~ Adopting GPA-79-7 to the Chula Vista General Plan SUBMITTED BY D. J. Peterson, Director of Planning C ITEM EXPLANATION (4/5TH'S VOTE REQUIRED YES NO X ) A. BACKGROUND 1. During one of its study sessions, the Planning Commission expressed concern over several anachronisms, inconsistencies and outdated forecasts in the text of the General Plan. 2. The Planning Department has perused the text of the said parent document, and has prepared a list of recommended changes. These changes are proposed under the "Recommendation" section of this report and discussed under the "Analysis" section. 3. An Initial Study, IS-79-38, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project was conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator on January 22, 1979. The Coordinator concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the Negative Declaration. B. ANALYSIS 1. The proposed omnibus amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan is partially "housekeeping" in nature, and is designed to eliminate conflicts between the Plan's text and plan diagram, and to update demographic forecasts and land-use policy. On the other hand, some of the proposed changes are also substantive in nature, and, if adopted, would affect the Chula Vista Planning Areas projected patterns of growth, development, and conservation. nnn n . u~.~r • JC EXN IB ITS continued on su 1 emental a e Agreement Resolution X Ordinance Plat Notification List OtherRes.GPA-79-7 ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached X Submitted on FINANCIAL IMPACT None STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt the Negative Declaration, IS-79-38, and find that the proposed amend- ment to the Chula Vista General Plan will have no significant environmental impact. 2. Adopt the proposed omnibus amendment to the text of the Chula Vista General Plan, as set forth in Exhibit A. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION On April 18, 1979 the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that the City Council amend the General Plan in accordance with Resolution GPA-79-7. COUNCIL ACTION ~~~ ~_G~~~~~ ~,..r+... ~--~.-~ :.. ~ _~~ AGENDA ITEM NO 6,6a Meeting of 5/8/79 Supplemental page No. 2 2. The first proposed change involves the proposed regional shopping center in the Rice Canyon area. While the existing text calls for a 75-acre regional center, the proposed amendment would scale the site down to approximately 40 acres, and provide commercial land-use options for the site. The proposed changes are consonant with the recently adopted E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. 3. The second change proposed under the omnibus amendment addresses the General Plan's sanction of vast areas of high-density residential throughout much of the Central Chula Vista Community. The new text suggests caution in the implementation of the plan, and recommends that the rezoning of land within the involved community be based on thorough planning and traffic engineering studies. The said new text also urges the protection of the orderly and stable single-family dwelling enclaves of the Central Community from piecemeal incursions of high-density development. This protection is the basis of the City of Chula Vista's Areas-in- Transition Program. 4. The existing text of the General Plan calls for extensive high-density residential development on the periphery of Southwestern College. This policy is not supported by the area's pattern of circulation, its topography, or by the Specific Plan for E1 Rancho del Rey. Furthermore, the history of American city planning provides ample evidence that high residential densities and collegiate campuses often coalesce to produce urban decline, if not blight. The density proposed for the College area under the omnibus amendment is medium in range, and corresponds to the density policy of the E1 Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. 5. The omnibus amendment also addresses the Bayfront area. Although this area was formerly called the Tidelands Industrial Belt, and was primarily reserved for industrial development, it is now governed by the Bayfront Specific and Bay- front Redevelopment Plans. The land use proposed under these plans includes recreation, residential, and visitor commercial, as well as industrial. The proposed change in the industrial policy of the text conciliates Chula Vista's industrial-development policies with its Bayfront objectives. 6. The State Highway Commission has removed the San P1iguel Freeway (Route 125) from the State Highway Plan. The City of Chula Vista has eliminated this freeway from the General Plan's plan diagram, and has redesignated the proposed artery a "major road." The change in the text would correspond with the said diagramatic changes, and would thereby promote plan consistency and credibility. 7. The amendment under consideration also incorporates the proposal that Second Avenue be deleted from the list of major roads. This street serves a well-ordered, single family area, and cannot be effectively widened without substantially reducing peripheral residential enjoyment. Furthermore, CPO's "1978 Average Daily Traffic Volumes, San Diego Metropolitan Area" study indicates that Second Avenue does not carry an arterial volume of traffic. 8. The existing text of the General Plan calls for the location of the County's South Bay offices in the Municipal Civic Center, or adjacent thereto. Under the proposed amendment, the County's administrative offices and courts would be sited on the lands acquired for their accommodation. These lands are located in the southwesterly quadrant of Third Avenue and "H" Street. 9. The proposed amendment updates the City of Chula Vista's population forecast, and brings it into a state of consistency with the projections of the Housing General Plan Element, and those of the Comprehensive Planning Organization. 10. Under the proposed amendment the residential standard for areas designated "Very High Density" could be escalated where senior housing is proposed. This escalation is designed to promote the economic feasibility of low and moderate income senior housing, in accordance with the goals, objectives, and statements of policy of the Housing Element of the General Plan. gb59 t 4 s ~ AGENDA ITEM N0 6,6a Meeting of 5/8/79 Supplemental page No. 3 The proposed amendment embodies safeguards which would protect the order, amenity, environmental quality, and fluid circulation of the Chula Vista Planning Area from the adverse impacts of "very, very high density." The zoning legislation, which would be required to implement the subject density escalation, would contain specific regulations which would augment the amendment's safeguards. 11. Finally, the omnibus amendment restates this municipality's adopted policies for the growth, development, and conservation of the Bayfront Community. C. CONCLUSION The adoption of the proposed amendment would increase effectiveness and viability of the Chula Vista General Plan. By resolving conflicts in policy, which have developed over the past 13 years, the credibility of the General Plan would also be promoted by the adoption of the said amendment. y~s9 June 26, 1979 T0: The Honorable Mayor/Chairman and Council/Members FROM: Lane F. Cole, City Manager, ~' ~~ SUBJECT: Attached Memo Concerning Indebtedness in the Bayfront Redevelopment Area Attached is a memo from the Community Development Department concerning the need to incur additional debt to the Bayfront Redevelopment area through a loan from the City. I recommend approval of the loan from the City to the Redevelopment Agency and adoption of the two attached resolutions. LFC:DPB:as Attachments q~6° . j June 26, 1979 `T T0: Lane F. Cole, City Manager (~ VIA: Bill Robens, Deputy City Manager ~v '; FROM: Douglas P. Boyd, Acting Community Development Director SUBJECT: Creating a Debt in the Bayfront Redevelopment Area to Protect the Tax Increment In order for the Redevelopment Agency to continue to receive the full tax increment in the Bayfront, the law requires that there be an outstanding debt that is equal to or greater than the tax increment. Since the Bayfront bonds are defeased, they are no longer a debt to the project. The only existing debt is a $350,000 loan from the City of Chula Vista to the Redevelopment Agency. Since the annual tax increment in the Bayfront is nearly $700,000,. the Agency can lose as much as $350,000 in tax increment during the next fiscal year. When the City defeased the bonds and initiated action to combine the Bayfront pro- ject with the Town Centre I project through A6405, it was assumed that AB405 would be in effect by June 30, 1979. With AB405 in effect, and the two projects combined,. the total debt is greater than the total tax increment because of the size of the debt in Town Centre I. Unfortunately, it appears that AB405 will not be signed by the Governor by June 30. The attached two resolutions for action by the City Council and Redevelopment Agency will create a debt in the Bayfront that is greater than the tax increment. There is an existing $350,000 loan from the City to the Redevelopment Agency. That loan was made on March 8 and becomes due and payable June 30, 1979 with an interest rate of 10% per annum. The attached resolution for the City Council authorizes a loan to the Redevelopment Agency for $710,836 ($350,000 of which is the existing loan, $350,000 of which is additional loan, and $10,836 of which is interest on the loan of March 8). Since the loan will no longer be needed once AB~05 is signed, it is assumed that the loan period will be approximately two weeks. Therefore, by the middle of July, the loan should be returned to the City and interest payments made. DPB:as Attachments ReG v