The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutrda min 1987/04/30 Ml"U,ES OF ~"~DJOUR"£D R£GUl~R MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, April 30,1987 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Council Conference Room City Hall MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Cox; Members Nader, Moore, McCandliss and Malcolm MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: None Executive Director Goss, Community Development Director Desrochers, Agency Attorney Harron UNANIMOUS CONSENT RESOLUTION 809 APPROVING RIDER TO THE DISPOSITION AGREEMENT WITH HOMART DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AND DEVELOPMENT Agency Attorney Harron stated thi s item can be di scussed under the Brown Act. If there is less than a full Council, a unanimous vote is required to deal with matters not on the posted agenda. Thi s matter came up after the agenda was posted, therefore, it is appropriate to take action. Chairman Cox noted all four members present signed the Unanimous Consent form to allow the consideration of this resolution. (Member McCandliss was not present for this item.) The publ i c heari ng of April 28, 1987, regardi ng the Di sposi ti on and Development Agreement with Homart Development Company was reopened by Chairman Cox. Community Development Director Desrochers stated since the Tuesday, April 28, meeti ng of the Council /Agency, Homart Development Company representati ves met wi th thei r Board of Di rectors. The Board of Di rectors came back with a stipulation that all excess monies invested into the project be placed into a fund that woul d be uti 1 i zed for tenants and for the procurement of a fourth major department store. If after four years any funds are remaining, 20% woul d be cl aimed by the Agency and 80% by Homart. Mr. Desrochers further stated staff recommends approval of the resolution. He noted the City/Agency has the qual i ty assurance wi th the Desi gn Revi ew Commi ttee and the sti pu1 ati on in the DDA that a quality center will be built. Member Nader asked if the only deviation from the deliberations of Tuesday, April 28, is in paragraph 2 of the Rider? Mr. Desrochers responded yes, and in item C in particular. There being no public testimony, the public hearing was closed. Redevelopment Agency -2- April 30, 1987 RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN COX, the reading of text was waived by unanimous consent. A roll call vote was taken: Cha i rman Cox - Aye Member Nader - Aye Member Moore - Aye Member Malcolm - No UNAN IMOUS CONSENT Member Malcolm asked that discussion of a legislative Bill AB 2190 (Chacon) be considered by the Agency. He learned of this Bill on this date and it will be comi ng before the 1 egi sl ature on Wednesday, May 6. The Bi 11 mandates that every jurisdiction have districts. This would impact this City by requiring district elections and changing the make-up of the City Council. Agency Attorney Harron stated the Brown Act requirement is met because Mr. Malcolm became aware of this matter on this date (after the agenda was posted) and the action is needed immediately. He further noted all four members would need to approve considering this item. MS (Malcolm/Cox) Under the Unanimous Consent provisions of the Brown Act, move to consi der taki ng acti on on AB 2190 (Chacon). Member Nader commented that a meeti ng of the Ci ty Council is schedul ed for Tuesday, May 5 at 4 :00 p. m. He suggested consi deri ng thi s item at that time and promptly telegram the position of the Council/Agency. Executive Director Goss pointed out a telegram sent Tuesday night might have less effect compared to sending it at this time. Because it is a bill that has generic impact throughout the state, normally the League of Ca1 iforni a Ci ti es wou1 d assemble the information into a packet that would be used in lobbying efforts on Monday and Tuesday. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. vote. ) MSUC (Malcolm/Moore) to oppose AB 2190 (Chacon). (Member McCandl i ss was not present for thi s 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF APRIL 2,1987 AND APRIL 7,1987. MSUC (Moore/Cox) approve the mi nutes of Apri 1 2, 1987 and Apri 1 7, 1987. (Member McCand1iss not present for the vote.) 2. WORKSHOP REPORT: DISCUSSION DF THE ISSUES RELATING TO THE RESUBMISSION OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR THE MIDBAYFRONT Agency Attorney Harron stated it is the recommendation of staff that before begi nni ng di scussi on of thi s i tern, that a di scussi on of the 1 ega 1 perimeters be held in Closed Session. Redeve1opment Agency -3- Apri1 30, ¡ 987 MSUC (Malcolm/Cox) to go into Closed Session to discuss Sierra Club vs. Coastal Commission. Adjourned to Closed Session at 4:15 p.m. Reconvened at 5:50 p.m. Chairman Cox noted all members were present. during the Closed Session.) (Member McCandliss arrived Chai rman Cox suggested thi s i tern be conti nued to Thursday, May 7. Due to the length of the Closed Session, more time is needed to deal with this important project. Lyl e Gabri e1 son, Ri ck Engi neeri ng, representi ng Company, stated this would be acceptable. It was noted that the agenda prepared for the Thursday, May 7, regu1 ar Redevelopment Agency meeti ng woul d be moved to Tuesday, May 5, foll owi ng the City Council meeting. A public hearing previously noticed will need to be held at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, May 7. Chula Vista Investment MSUC (Moore/Nader) move that this item be continued to 4:00 p.m. on May 7, 1987 in the Council Conference Room. 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. 4. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None. 5. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: None. 6. MEMBERS' COMMENTS: None. ADJOURNMENT at 6:00 p.m. to May 5, 1987 scheduled to begin at 4:00 p.m. following the City Council meeting ~!- Communi ty Development Di rector WPC 2916H