Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1983/11/03 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, November 3, 1983 Council Chambers 7:00 p.m. Public Services Building ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT Chairman Cox (arrived late); Members Moore, McCandliss (arrived late), Scott and Malcolm MEMBERS ABSENT None STAFF PRESENT Executive Director Goss, Community Development Director Desrochers, Development Specialist Kassman, Special Counsel Reed, Agency Attorney Harron Item No.2 was considered first due to a need for a 4/5ths vote on Item 1 - Resolution. ITEM NO.2 - REPORT: REQUEST FOR FUNDING NEW COMMERC IAL BUILDING AT 247 THIRD AVENUE UNDER COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM Request for a loan was made by Tom Money for construction of a 5,000 square foot retail office building at 247 Third Avenue. Low bid for construction was $215,000. Community Development Director Desrochers reported because of Redevelopment Agency policy he was bringing this matter forward for review and approval. At th e meet i ng of October 5, 1983, the Town Centre Development Corporation approved a subsidy loan through the Commercial Rehabilitation Loan Program in the amount of $86,000. Member Scott stated that all of Mr. Money's previous projects have been excellent. (Chairman Cox arrived at this time.) Member Moore questioned what the percent of interest was on the $86,000. Community Development Director Desrochers stated ten percent (10%) is the rate of interest at this time. MOTION TO ACCEPT REPORT MSUC (Malcolm/Moore) to accept report. ITEM NO.1 - RESOLUTION 457 APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR BAYFRONT INFORMATION PROGRAM The approved Redevelopment Agency budget for travel and expenses is proposed to be amended to include additional funds for the promotion of the Bayfront Local Coastal Plan prior to the Coastal Commi ss ion meeting in December. Recommendation is to adopt the resolution and appropriate an additional $1,000 to the Bayfront travel account for Bayfront Local Coastal Plan purposes. Redevelopment Agency Meeting - 2 - November 3, 1983 RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and adopted unanimously. ITEM NO.3 - REPORT: OTAY VALLEY ROAD EIR AND REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Director Desrochers reported that every effort was being made to provide public input relative to the Otay Valley Road EIR and Redevelopment Plan, despite the need for a compressed time schedule. The public will be given every opportunity to have input into this process. A community meeting will be held November 15, 1983, to allow informal comments. Additionally, on November 9th, 30th and a public hearing in December, there will be formal pub 1 i c comments schedul ed at the Planning Commission meeting. A community meeting is scheduled for Conference Rooms 2 and 3 from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., November 15th. From that informal meeting, it will be decided whether to set up a meeting in a school or on a grandeur scale. Letters have been sent out to all the Homeowner's Associations and other persons that have been involved in the process to date. Member Moore stated that at the Tuesday Council meeting when Council approved distribution of the Redevelopment Plan, staff did not bring out some of the key things in their report. He felt that if these things had been explained more in depth at the Tuesday night meeting a lot of concerns would have been avoided and would have been understood since most of the questions were not appropriate for the Redevelopment Plan but were more of the construction project. Member McCandliss arrived at this time. Cha irman Cox quest ioned if it would be appropriate for the members of the Redevelopment Agency/City Council to be in attendance at the meeting of November 15, 1983. Special Counsel Reed advised against participation at this meeting and to leave it at staff level. At this time, Chairman Cox acknowledged that Mr. Henry Koh 1 er requested to speak regarding the Otay Valley Road Draft EIR and Redevelopment Plan. Mr. Henry Kohler, 1547-222 Sonora Drive, Chula Vista, CA, stated that he estimated only one percent (1%) of the tourists that come to San Diego come to Chula Vista. They come from allover the country to see Sea World, the Wild Animal Park and tour Ba 1 boa Park, and even bypass Chula Vista to visit Tijuana. Chula Vista has no attraction for tourists. He suggested using the 304 acres of land now designated for park area in a way that would attract visitors to Chula Vista, and use part of the $39 mi 11 ion Otay Vall ey Road Redevelopment for a local attraction. His suggestions were: public school, athletic activity park containing an Olympic competition outdoor swimming pool, polo field, athletic activities both developmental and competitive. Redevelopment Agency Meeting - 3 - November 3, 1983 Mr. Larry McKenna, 1347 Mt. View Lane, Chula Vista, CA 92011, on behalf of the Citizens Action Network, noted objections to the premature completion and distribution of the draft Environmental Impact Report and proceeded to highlight the basis of their principal objection. He stated that the policy of the California Environmental Quality Act finds it necessary to secure all conflicting views prior to preparation of a draft EIR. Fifteen (15) pages of comments were submitted by the citizens within the 30-day review period which should have been used to help frame the preparation of the draft EIR. The draft EIR was completed October 14, 1983, four days before the end of the 30-day review period. The views contained in 16 pages of comments submitted on October 14, 1983, cannot be waived, and should have been considered at the initial time of preparation. Mr. McKenna commented that his second concern was the EIR was incomplete. Special Counsel Reed stated he did not agree with Mr. McKenna and explained; you begin with a draft EIR, solicit comments, take them into account which is to assist you in preparing the draft EIR, but don't have to take all comments into account in preparing the draft because that is the purpose of a draft, to solicit more input. Agency Attorney Harron was in agreement with Mr. Reed. He mentioned that the Legislature has amended the guidelines since July 1983, to specifically state that at the draft EIR state ?,ou mat Co~su,lt, it's a discretionary decision that you may bring in citizen lnput, ut on t have to. Ch airman Cox clarified the procedure and further stated it was Council's intention and the Redevelopment Agency's decision to have a full EIR. Therefore, the questions Mr. McKenna had drafted were not as pertinent or as important into that time sequence to make sure that they were forma lly included as part of the draft EIR. They will be analyzed and addressed in the final Environmental Impact Report coming to the Planning Commission, Redevelopment Agency, and City Council. MOTION TO ACCEPT REPORT MSUC (Moore/Cox) to accept the report. MEMBERS COMMENTS Member Scott stated, in order to be a more effective body, we are going to have to contro 1 input to the Council or the Redeve 1 opment Agency. We are hearing the same testimony over and over, there must be some way to limit repetitive statements or presentations. He feels that this has become repetitive because )eople feel if they repeat themselves often enough, the Agency or Council wi 1 eventually get the message. Member Malcolm questioned if new signs going up within the City have gone through design review? Further mention was made of Bank of America and Broadway at Mulvaneys. Redevelopment Agency Meeting - 4 - November 3, 1983 Community Development Director Desrochers stated that the signs mentioned are not in the redevelopment project. DI RECTOR'S REPORT Executive Director Goss stated, in answer to Chairman Cox's question of the Senior Information and Referral sign, that bids were received towards construction on October 28, 1983, and installation is expected by December 1st. Executive Director Goss stated that the Bayfront sign panel was turned off by the Public Works crew until after the State has made it acceptable to their standards. The new sign at Holly Cleaners, next to the Silver Dollar has been taken down per Agency requirement. Munchner Kind'l has been informed about a covered tree well that is now being used for parking. This will be replaced with a tree and will continue to be monitored. Member Malcolm brought mention of the illegal signs that Counc i 1 noted on their recent tour throughout the City and that these signs were still up. He felt this matter should be brought back to Council after the allowed removal time period. Chairman Cox mentioned the repair work and freeway planks on Anthony's side of "E" Street are being removed and the median island will go back the way it was. Director Desrochers informed members that yacht sales, Ships Chandlery, liquor store, Dock Master Office, a delicatessen and parking are being built next to the marina. ADJOURNMENT at 8:05 p.m. to Closed Session, to reconvene on Tuesday, "'"boc 15, 1983, 'on",o, tho "'~, au . esroc ers Executive Secretary WPC 0885H