The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutcc min 1974/07/17 MINUTES OF A WORKSHOP MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held Wednesday July 17, 1974 A workshop meeting of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, California, was held on the above date beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, with the following Councilmen present: Councilmen Scott, Ilamilton, Hyde Councilmen absent: Councilmen Hobel and Egdahl Staff present: City Manager Thomson, City Attorney Lindberg, Director of Planning Peterson, Director of Public l~orks Cole, Director of Building and Housing Grady, Community Development Coordinator Henthorn THIRD AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT City Manager Thomson stated that staff is in need of policy direction from the Council in regard to a possible Third Avenue Redevelop- ment Project. Items for policy discussion might be: (1) Setting up an Ad Hoc Advisory Committee representing the area; (2) Indication of priorities; (5) Exercise of powers by Council or Agency? For example, condemnation of private property to implement the plan, Build- ing Code enforcement, relocation of existing tenants and owners and apply- ing assessment districts and alterna- tives; (4) Possibly hiring a consultant to do a a market analysis; ($) Financing which would be acceptable to the Council; (6) Goal in terms of how fast this project will move; (7) Design and theme; how far should rede- velopment go? Discussion Discussion was held during which the following points were brought out by Council and members of the business community respectively: Council {1) The business community members should get together and arrive at some kind of consen- sus as to what to do and where to go; they should also demonstrate a financial commitment to act; (3) a plan must be de- veloped; (4) one consideration is whether to use a consultant or in-house services; (5) the business community must display a drive; (6) the project is a worthy one, but it would be looked at as secondary at this point to the Bayfront Redevelopment Project; (7) a single redevelopment committee should be created with representatives from each of the four groups representing the business Workshop Meeting 2 July 17, 1974 community at this time; (8) this should be taken out of the hands of the separate groups representing the area - individuals could be pulled from these groups but not as repre- sentatives of the groups per se; (9) rede- velopment area should be defined; (10) need to have goals; (11) need to provide some seed money to have a study on Third Avenue and have a professional give some alternatives; (12) need to find out how much a consultant would cost. Business Community Members (1) Should be one group to handle this (one suggestion was for a larger group of 25 or 30; another suggestion was for a smaller group of perhaps 7 or 8); (2) no one in the business community will stand up and say what needs to be done; (3) City leadership should be shown in a way more than merely appoint- ing a committee; (4) everybody wants to do something, but nobody knows what to do first; (S) City would be t~relic~ if they do not have a study; (6) should find out what kind o~ redevelopment the downtown area would support; (7) should determine types of businesses to be located in the area (office, retail, etc.) Jack Henthorn Mr. Menthorn indicated he had recently spoken Community Development Coordinator with Mr. ~la~e Gruen of Gruen and Gruen and Associates who still has slot of data as a result of the Bayfront Study and has told Mr. Henthorn that a total package study of the area, including a plan and recommendation, could run from $15,000 to $40,000 -- the cost dependent upon the design, request or proposal from the City and how in-depth a study the Agency or Council would like to pursue. Mr. Gruen indicated to Mr. Itenthorn that he would recommend approaching a study on a two- phase basis. The first phase he termed a "user analysis" which would basically involve determining what the drawing points of our existing central business district are, who shops there, why they shop there, would they shop there if there was another regional center available, etc., and that phase could run approximately $10,000. This phase could take approximately three to four months to complete and it should not be undertaken prior to September or October of this year due to the fact that in thc summer there is a high transient rate which might distort the data. This phase of the study, therefore, would be completed sometime around the first of the year. The second stage of the study, if the Council decides to pursue this, would contain a cost-benefit analysis of the alter- native land uses for the City's type of busi- ness district and would relate the benefits of particular proposals to not only the cost associated with taxes and revenue generation, but also with the cost and benefits relating to relocation, displacement of existing tenants and so forth. Workshop Meeting 3 July 17, 1974 Financing the Study City Manager Thomson explained that the study could be broken into two parts: the first phase for $10,000 and that then applies to the $15,000 to $40,000 range, so if the City decides to go on with the study, that would not be lost. Two projects at one time In answer to Councilman Scott's query as to the possibility of carrying on two projects at one time (the Bayfront and Third Avenue), City Manager Thomson indicated this would be within the latitude the City has to pursue such. Motion to bring back resolution It was moved by Councilman Scott that a reso- lution be brought back at the next Council meeting to discuss with a full Council the possibility of a study. Councilman Hyde commented that the resolution should be to form a~l~ir~ Avenue Redevelopment Committee which would be an advisory body to attempt to provide a single organization made up of people in the business community who would speak as the voice for the business community. He added that he feels there should be a financial commitment from the business community for the study. Discussion Discussion ensued amongst Council and members of the business community. Comments brought out by members of the busi- ness community were: (1) The primary thing is to see if the people in the community are for such a project; (2) un1655 some effort is put forth to improve the downtown area, it will continue to get worse; (3) people refuse to get involved; (6) the City should take action; (5) getting people to put money out and not really know what they're getting into will be difficult; (6) people need to see some kind of a plan; (7) members of the business community should have been notified of the Council/Agency's consideration of a ~]ird Avenue Redevelopment Project. Council comments were as follows: (1) There should be an economic feasibility study telling the people in the area what ~his area will support; (2) primary benefici- aries of a redevelopment project in this area would be the Third Avenue Business Community; (5) it is not fair to the taxpayers of the City to have the City Council say the City is going to fund totally~, an investigation of the possibilities and prospects for redevelop- ment of the Third Avenue business community and not ask the business community to con- tribute to that; (4) need convincing proof that the District will not fall apart; (5) will never get anything off the ground until the City gets cooperation from the merchants. Financing Discussion further ensued on financing of a study and by whom (the City or the business community) such would be done. Workshop Meeting 4 July 17, 1974 Consultant to be in town City Manager Thomson stated that Mr. Gruen would be in the gan Diego area in about thirty days and has indicated willingness to try and work out some arrangement where he could perhaps come in and discuss this informally with the Agency in some fashion. Possibility of negative report Community Development Coordinator Henthorn commented that Mr. Gruen had explained that if it looked like the area would continue to go downhill, he would make that indication. In other words, he'd made a negative report. Previous motion withdrawn Councilman Scott withdrew the motion on the floor. Resolution to be brought It was moved by Councilman Scott and seconded back supporting first by Councilman Ityde that a resolution be phase of feasibility study brought back bringing forth the idea of having a first phase of the feasibility study and tied into that is that the Down- town Improvement and Parking District would come up with a $5,000 budget to promote their own business by September 1, 1974, in order to have it in effect by January 1, 1975. The motion carried by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Councilmen Scott, Hamilton, Hyde Noes: None Absent: Councilmen Hobel, Egdahl Need for Third Avenue Redevelopment Councilman Hyde commented that he feels it ~d~igory Committee is still necessary to establish a Third Avenue Redevelopment Advisory Committee. Briefing by consultant City Manager Thomson asked if the Council would be in favor of discussions with the consultant, Mr. Claude Gruen, when he is in the area. The Council indicated they would be in favor of this. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hamilton adjourned the meeting at 9:05 Deputy City C~rk