Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1978/08/15 Item 08CITY OF CHULA VISTA COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMEiVT Item No. 8 For meeting of 8/15/78 Conditionally ITEM TITLE Resolution ~~ `~ - Endorsin draft San Die o Count Re Tonal Growth Mana ement ~.~:._~~ 9 9 y 9 9 Plan SUBMITTED BY Director of Planning ITEM EXPLANATION (4/5TH'S VOTE REQUIRED YES. N0~) A, BACKGROUN D 1. On June 29, 1978 Mr. David C. Nielsen, County Director of Regional Growth Manage- ment, presented his agency's final draft Regional Growth Management Plan to the Board of Supervisors for its consideration and adoption. 2. The Board of Supervisors, after hearing a brief staff presentation and severa l hours of public testimony, continued the public hearing on the draft plan to August 3, 1978, to allow additional time for public input and testimony.. B. ~ ANALXSIS 1. The Chula Vista City Planning Department has actively participated in the County of San Diego's Growth Management Program, and has provided Director Nielsen with data, information, and professional pla-Wing advise on, the Chula Vista Planning Area. Despite. this participation the draft plan is not entirely responsive to the interests of the City of Chula Vista or congruous with the land use policies adopted by the City Council. 2. The San Diego County Draft Regional Growth Management Plan calls for the eventual urban development of that part of the Poggi Canyon area which lies immediately to the south of Telegraph Canyon Road and between the Pariview neighborhood and Otay Lakes Road. While the Draft Plan follows the County General Plan with respect to this matter, it is not consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan. The latter clearly designates the subject territory as "Agriculture and Reserve," and thereby makes it a constituent part of Chula Vista's peripheral greenbelt. (City staff is of the opinion that Chula Vista's "Agricul- ture and Reserve" planning designation is identifiable with the County Growth Management Plan's "Estate Development Areas" category.) Chula Vista's greenbelt substantially determines the form and structure of the Chula Vista settlement and promotes the high DMP;hm Agreement Resolution X EXHIBITS (continued on s~,olem_ ental pa.ga) Ordinance Plat Notification List Other Plan ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached Submitted on FINANCIAL IMPACT STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution endorsing the Draft Regional Growth Management Plan, upon the condition that the Poggi Canyon area, immediately adjacent to Telegraph Canyon Road, be designated "Estate Development Area," and that the E1 Rancho del Rey and North College areas be designated "1985 Current Development Areas." BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION COUNCIL ACTION ~~pRpgE?f by t;.e ~~~; u 9 .~ 3 G? 1::~i ~: vt r-1~ ~`]/ ~ ~ /V ~.............,..: .»..... ~la~e ....Y..,... AGENDA ITEM N.O. 8 Meeting of 8/1/78 Supplemental page No. 2 standard of the quality-of-life therein. Planning Area's natural environment. It deters urban sprawl and protects the 3. The Draft Growth h1anagement Plan, furthermore, designates the E1 Rancho del Rey and North College areas for "1995 Future Urban Development." Since the development of these areas is imminent, the Planning Department feels that they should be designated "1985 Current Urban Development.'' (See attached Growth Management Plan's Basic Land Use Categories.) 4. The text of the Draft Plan, at page 7, contains a summary of the County's growth management goals and objectives. This summary, which provides strong evidence of the plan's general responsiveness to the extraterritorial responsibility of the Region's several cities, reads: "Urban portions of the unincorporated area should be encouraged to either annex to an adjacent city or incorporate." The subject Growth P~anagement Plan, at page 1, clearly limits its juristiction to the "unincorporated area of San Diego County," and does not prescribe planning policy for city growth and development. In fact, the Draft Plan asserts that County development within a city's sphere-of-interest should be governed by the involved city's general plan and land use policies. 5. In conclusion, the Draft Plan, with the exception of its treatment of the Poggi Canyon, E1 Rancho del Rey, and North College areas, is an excellent regional planning proposal and, if adopted, would do much toward the promotion of the orderly growth and conservation of the San Diego Region. The said plan is predicated upon the concept that sound regional planning and local home rule are inseparable. %23C San Diego County Draft Growth Management Plan's 3~asic Land Use Categories a. Current Urban Development Areas - Uses will include those permitted by the County General Plan and Zone Compatibility Matrix. - In areas planned for densities at or above 4.3 dwelling units per acre (General Plan categories 4 through 9) development will be encouraged at the maximum densities permitted by the General Plan. - On residential lands achievement of overall densities of four dwelling units will 6e encouraged. Housing mix targets will be established for each Urban Development Area. - The outer boundaries of all Urban Development Areas will be designated as urban limit lines beyond which urban development will not be permitted through 1995. b. Future Urban Development Areas - On an interim basis, minimum parcel sizes of ten acres or greater will be permitted. - Smaller parcel sizes will be permitted only when: (1) An area is annexed to an adjacent city or development is conditioned upon annexation. (2) An area is changed from Future Urban to Current Urban status. - Boundaries between Current Urban and Future Urban Development Areas will be evaluated every three years. If found necessary, boundaries will be adjusted to accommodate new urban growth demands. c. Estate Development Areas - Where authorized, minimum parcel sizes of two to twenty acres will be permitted depending on the slope criteria in the underlying General Plan land use designation. - Clustering or lot averaging will be permitted, provided: (1) The project is forty acres or larger. (2) At least forty percent of the project area is in permanent open space. (3) The project will not require urban levels of service. d. Rural Areas - Where authorized, minimum parcel sizes of four to forty acres will be per- mitted depending on the slope and rainfall criteria in the Groundwater Policy, or on adopted General Plan designations where adequate groundwater is assured. e. Country Towns - Uses will include those permitted by the County General Plan, Zone Compatibility Matrix and, where appropriate, the Groundwater Policy.