v . 0 0 4 P a g e | 1
January 23, 2024
ITEM TITLE
Policy, General Plan, and Chula Vista Municipal Code Updates: Growth Management Policies, Public Facilities Financing Plans, and Development Services Department Appeal Procedures Report Number: 24-0019
Location: Citywide
Department: Development Services
G.C. § 84308: Yes.
Environmental Notice : The activity is not a “Project” as defined under Section 15378 of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) State Guidelines. Therefore, pursuant to State Guidelines Section 15060(c)(3), no environmental review is required.
Recommended Action
1) Adopt of a resolution amending the following: City’s Master Fee Schedule (General Planning Fees – Appeal filing fee ); Chula Vista General Plan: Land Use Element , Housing Element , Environmental Element, and removal of the Growth Management Element; and the Chula Vista General Plan Implementation Plan 2) Place an Ordinance on first reading amending the following: Chula Vista Public Facilities Financing Plan Guidelines; Chula Vista Municipal Code: Title 1 (General Provisions ), Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals, and Welfare), Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) , Title 12 (Streets and Sidewalks) , Title 15 (Buildings and Construction), Title 17 (Environmental Quality), Title 18 (Subdivisions), Title 19 (Planning and Zoning), Title 21 (Historic Preservation) (First Reading).
SUMMARY
This item proposes amendments to the General Plan, related policy documents, the Chula Vista Municipal Code (“CVMC”), and an update to Master Fee Schedule No. 14 -100 (General Planning Fees) associated with project appeal filing fee amount . The changes are a result of the dissolution of the Growth Management Oversight Commission in November 2022 and procedural inconsistencies found in the CMVC related to appeal applications for Development Services items. Additionally, the item includes updates to the existing General Plan Implementation Plan, the Public Facilities Financing Plan Guidelines, and several titles of the P a g e | 2
CVMC. The proposed changes are intended to provide the public and staff with consistency, predictability, and continue to streamline development requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activities for compliance with CEQA and has determined that the activities are not a “Proj ect” as defined under Section 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines because they will not result in a significant physical change in the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15060(c)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the activities are not subject to CE QA. Thus, no environmental review is required.
If the activities described in this item are deemed to be a “Project”, the Director of Development Services has reviewed the proposed activities for compliance with CEQA and has determined that the actions qu alify for the “common sense” exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). The actions involve administrative updates to the CVMC relating to appeal processes for discretionary decisions and eliminating submittals that are already required for CEQA review, as well as updates to some City General Plan Elements to ensure compliance with State law. The actions of updating and modifying the CVMC and General Plan with procedural and clerical changes will not result in an intensification of uses or a change in development potential within the City above what already is permitted under the existing land use and zoning policies of the CVMC and under State law. Based on an analysis of the nature and type of these procedural and clerical changes to the CVMC and the General Plan, the actions will not have a significant effect on the environment.
Therefore, no further environmental review is required.
BOARD/COMMISSION/COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
Development Oversight Committee: The Development Oversight Commit tee is comprised of developers, business owners, community organizations, engineers, architects, and contractors. The Development Oversight Committee was provided with the proposed revisions and amendments at their meeting on September 27, 2023, and recommended approval.
Planning Commission: On December 13, 2023, the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to adopt Resolution No. 2023-26 (Attachment 1), recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving the proposed amendments.
DISCUSSION
Growth Management Policies and Public Facilities Financing Plans Background
On November 8, 2022, the City Council approved revisions to the General Rules and structure/scope for various City Boards and Commissions. Among the changes was the dissolution of the Growth Management Oversight Commission (“GMOC”). The GMOC was originally formed, in part, to provide an independent annual review of the effectiveness of the General Plan regarding development progress within the City.
Additionally, annual reviews were con ducted reviewing the implementation of the Growth Management Element of the General Plan and the Growth Management Program.
P a g e | 3
The dissolution of the GMOC resulted from the depletion of vacant land from east of Interstate 805 to the eastern city boundary, and the progression of building out previously approved Sectional Planning Areas (“SPAs”) since approximately 2014. The majority of the City is now planned for how it will grow. In addition, legislative actions signed by the Governor of California over the past five years make any growth management-related measures an impermissible barrier to increasing the supply of housing and in direct contradiction to State law(s).
As a result, this item proposes to remove the remaining vestiges of the GMOC and related policies in the following documents: 1) the General Plan; 2) the General Plan Implementation Plan; 3) the City’s Public Facilities Financing Plan (“PFFP”) Guideli nes; and 4) several titles within the CVMC. The following subsections summarize changes within each of the relevant policy documents.
General Plan and Implementation Plan
The General Plan has several elements which reference growth management or the GMOC . The proposed amendments to the General Plan include the removal of the General Plan Growth Management Element in its entirety, and removal of all references to the GMOC within the General Plan document and its Implementation Plan (Attachments 2-5). This action will bring the General Plan into alignment with the dissolution of the GMOC and State law. The changes also remove requirements for projects to conform with growth management thresholds as well as annual reporting of conformance with growth manageme nt practices. Both requirements are considered potential obstacles towards streamlining new development and are in direct conflict with State law(s).
CVMC Chapter 19.92
Chapter 19.92 contains the requirements for projects to provide two types of reports: A ir Quality Improvement Plans and Water Conservation Plans. These reports and their respective thresholds will be removed from the CVMC (Attachment 6). The purpose of the removal is that both reports are duplicative of submissions an applicant must provide during a proposed development project’s analysis with CEQA. While analyzing the CEQA impacts of a project, staff must analyze certain environmental impacts such as air quality, hydrology/water quality, biological and cultural resources, and transportation. To require the same types of reports through the Municipal Code is an unnecessary duplicative requirement.
PFFP Guidelines
Additionally, with the removal of air and water quality thresholds requirements in CVMC Chapter 19.92, there are ancillary clarifica tions to the submittal and preparation requirements contained in the PFFP Guidelines (Attachment 7). These minor clarifications will help further streamline the submittal and content requirements for PFFPs, how and when infrastructure improvements will be funded, and how amendments to adopted plans can be initiated.
Appeal Procedures for Development Services Department Discretionary Decisions On March 7, 2023, the City Council adopted an ordinance amending various CVMC sections streamlining and clarifying permit processes and regulations. Within those changes included revisions to the appeals process for discretionary planning applications, including:
P a g e | 4
After a valid appeal application has been submitted, the City has thirty (30) calendar days to set the public hearing date. Additionally, that date shall occur within sixty (60) calendar days of receiving the valid appeal application.
Allowing only one (1) appeal of a discretionary decision, with the decision of the body to which the original decision was appealed being final.
All Development Services Department Appeals to Be Filed with City Clerk Currently, the CVMC does not indicate a centralized location for various types of appeals to be submitted and received. Some appeals are to be submitted to the Development Services Department (“DSD”), while others are to be submitted to the City Clerk’s office. This has created situations where appellants are confused as to where to submit their appeal, as well as confusion for City Staff. This update allows the City to provide a clear, consistent, and predictable process for the filing and acceptance of all appeals associated with DSD decisions.
Staff is proposing amendments to several CVMC titles to reflect that all appeal applic ations are to be submitted and processed through the City Clerk’s Office. In addition, the Master Fee Schedule would be amended to reflect an increase in the app eal filing fee from $250 to $500 (Attachment 9). This change will cover staff’s time processing these types of applications and provide both consistency and predictability for would-be appellants. This update will assist DSD staff in providing clear and consistent messaging on how and where an appellant may file their project appeal.
Levels of Review Authority
The CVMC currently provides for a confusing set of review levels for different kinds of decisions that can be appealed. For example, CVMC Section 19.14.050(B) states anyone who disagrees with a Zoning Administrator decision, “may appeal such r uling to the Planning Commission.” However, the next section (19.14.100) relating to Conditional Use Permits states, “[t]he applicant or other interested persons may appeal the decision of the Zoning Administrator to the City Council.” To create consistenc y and predictability, and to reflect the existing levels of authority granted by the City Council to lower reviewing bodies (namely, the Planning Commission and Zoning Administrator), Staff is recommending codifying the hierarchy of decision -maker levels. If approved, this change would make any and all decisions of the Zoning Administrator appealable to the Planning Commission, and any decisions made by the Planning Commission appealable to the City Council. Whether a decision is appealed from the Zoning Administrator to the Planning Commission or a Planning Commission decision to the City Council, the second decision shall be the final decision on a development project.
DECISION-MAKER CONFLICT
Staff has reviewed the decision contemplated by this action and has determined that it is not site-specific and consequently, the 500-foot rule found in California Code of Regulations Title 2, section 18702.2(a)(11), is not applicable to this decision for purposes of determining a disqualifying real property-related financial conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act (Cal. Gov't Code § 87100, et seq.).
Staff is not independently aware and has not been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for a decision-maker conflict of interest in this matter.
P a g e | 5
CURRENT-YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
There is no current-year fiscal impact to the General Fund or the Development Services Fund as a result of this action.
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
There is no ongoing fiscal impact on the General Fund or the Development Services Fund as a result of this action.
ATTACHMENTS
1 – Planning Commission Resolution 2023-26
2 – Draft Amendments to General Plan Land Use Element
3 – Draft Amendments to General Plan Housing Element
4 – Draft Amendments to General Plan Environmental Element 5 – Draft Amendments to General Plan Implementation Plan 6 – Draft Amendments to CVMC Chapter 19.92
7 – Draft Amendments to PFFP Guidelines
8 – Draft Amendments to CVMC Titles 1, 9, 10, 12, 15, 17, 18, 19, and 21 9 – Draft Amendment to Master Fee Schedule No. 14-100
Staff Contact: Chris Mallec, AICP, Senior Planner, Development Services Laura C. Black, AICP, Director of Development Services