Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1987/05/21 (4) MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, May 21, 1987 4:45 p.m. Counc i 1 Conference Room City Hall ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chai rman Cox; 14embers Nader, Moore, McCandl i ss and Malcolm MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Executive Director Goss, Community Development Director Desrochers, Assistant Community Development Director Gustafson, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Malcolm/McCandliss) to approve the minutes of 4/21/87, 4/28/87, 4/30/87, and 5/5/87. (The vote was 4-0; Chairman Cox was not present for the vote.) CONSENT CALENDAR Member McCandliss requested items 5 and 6 be pulled from the consent calendar. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 2, 3, 4, 7, 8 AND g WERE OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and adopted unanimously. (The vote was 4-0; Chairman Cox was not present for the vote.) 2. RESOLUTION 819 EXTENDING AGREEMENT WITH PETERSON, THELAN AND PRICE FOR LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH BAYFRONT LITIGATION AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR On June 21,1984, the City Council approved using the law firm of Peterson, Thelan and Price to represent the City in the Sierra Club's lawsuit against the Coastal Coß111ission. In addition, the law firm was retained to represent the City regarding the State Route 54 matter. It was recommended that the Agency adopt the resolution approving an extension of the agreement for speci al counsel services rel ative to Bayfront 1 iti gati on and appropri ati ng funds therefor. 3. RESOLUTION 820 APPROPRIATING AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $10,000 FOR THE REPAIR OF THE NATURE INTERPRETIVE CENTER ACCESS ROAD (EXCLUDING THE SOUTH LEVEE ROAD) The dirt access road to the Nature Interpretive Center was in a general state of disrepair from use by heavy construction vehicles. The Center will be opening in July and the roadway needs to be repaired before the City's shuttle service to the facility begins. ------------------------ .--.----- -- ------ Redevelopment Agency Minutes -2- May 21, 1987 4. REPORI : SITES FOR NATURE INTERPRETIVE CENTER TEMPORARY PARKING LOT AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR MINOR IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING BAY BOULEVARD RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR INTERIM PARKING I~IPACTS Redevelopment Agency members directed staff to prepare a report regarding the possibility of providing temporary parking closer to the Nature Interpretive Center. It was recommended that the Agency direct staff to prepare the existing Bay Boulevard right-of-way north of E Street for use as an interim parking area for the Nature Interpretive Center and appropriate $3,000 therefore, and to proceed wi th processi ng necessary in order to uti 1 i ze the SDG&E right-of-way for the NIC temporary parking lot. 5. REPOR1: GREENWALD/McDONALD REQUEST FOR CONCEPT APPROVAL OF PROPOSAL TO IMPROVE AND UTILIZE DRAINAGE CHANNELS AT BAY BOULEVARD AND "J" STREET This item was pulled. 6. REPORT: SOUTH BAY REGIONAL CENTER INSTRUCTIONS TO TRUSTEE This item was pulled. 7. RESOLUTION 821 APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH LEE C. JOHNSON AND CO. FOR THE APPRAISAL OF THE RIGHI-OF -WAY OF FIFTH AVENUE FOR A SUM NOT-TO-EXCEED $4,000 The Agency recently entered into a Disposition and Development Agreement with the Homart Development Company which includes the disposition of the portion of the ri ght-of-way of Fi fth Avenue between H Street and I Street. Thi s right-of-way was deeded to the City by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The conveyance from HUD requires that the City/Agency establish a fai r market val ue for the ri ght-of-way for the purpose of payi ng HUD for the conveyance. The Agency was requested to approve a contract with Lee C. Johnson and Co. to appraise the street to establish its value. 8. RESOLUTION 822 APPROVING TRANSFER OF FUNDS FOR EVALUATION OF ECONOMIC ISSUES BY GRUEN GRUEN + ASSOCIATES RELATING TO THE TOWN CENIRE II REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT In March of this year, the Redevelopment Agency retained the services of Gruen Gruen + Associ ates to perform an independent eval uati on of economi c issues related to the expansion of the Chula Vista Shopping Center. The Agency was requested to transfer funds to cover thi s expense. t.1ember Mal colm expressed concerns over the bond market condi ti ons and the changing interest rates as it pertai ns to the Town Centre II Redevelopment Project. Community Development Director Desrochers responded staff will report back to the Agency at the time of setting the date for the bond sale to advise the Agency as to conditions and if the sale should proceed; review the proposed terms and receive authority from the Agency for the sale. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -3- May 21, 1987 9. RESOLUTION 823 APPROVING TRANSFER OF FUNDS ASSOCIATED WITH SPECIAL COUNSEL SERVICES RENDERED BY McDONOUGH, HOLLAND & ALLEN FOR THE TOWN CENTRE II REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT On April 2, 1987, the Redevelopment Agency approved a contract extension for McDonough, Holland & Allen for special counsel services associated with the Town Centre II Redevelopment Project. An additional $10,000 was appropriated (loaned by the City to the Agency) specifically for services to negotiate and prepare the Disposition and Development Agreement with Homart. Because of the complexity and time required to complete the DDA, the Agency was requested to authorize the transfer of an additional $10,000 from within the Town Centre II budget to cover existing as well as future services and expenses. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR PULLED ITEMS 5. REPORT: GREENWALD/McDONALD REQUEST FOR CONCEPT APPROVAL OF PROPOSAL TO IMPROVE AND UTILIZE DRAINAGE CHANNELS AT BAY BOULEVARD AND "J" STREET Greenwald/McDonald is the representative of the owners of the Marina Gateway, project parcels 2, 3 and 4 located on Bay Boulevard north and south of "J" Street. They have been attempting to market these properties for development of a hotel/motel and restaurant to service the adjacent uses and freeway travelers. In the opinion of the owners, the sites would be more marketable for a better quality development if the adjacent City-owned drainage channels were covered and shown to be available for utilization as developable land. Greenwal d/McDona 1 d requested that the Agency consi der granti ng an easement over the drainage channels and participate financially in the construction to defray the initial capital outlay necessary to complete improvements. It was the recommendation of staff that the Agency approve the owners concept but require the owner to return to the Agency with engineering and economic studies. Member ~1cCandl i ss poi nted out that the benefit from thi s proposal woul d be si gnificantly recei ved by the owners. She woul d 1 i ke to see the engi neeri ng and economic studies come back to the Agency. Mr. Desrochers stated staff would like to see a motel developed at that intersection and enlarging the land by covering the channel will provide that opportunity. At this point, staff is looking for concept approval from the Agency. Mr. Desrochers further noted this would be a very positive development because of the fact the drainage channel would be covered. It will provide more use and enhance the entrance to the City at J Street. MSUC (Moore/McCandl i ss) to accept the report. Malcolm was not present for the vote.) (The vote was 4-0; t~ember Redevelopment ~gency Minutes -4- May 21,1987 6. REPORT: SOUTH BAY REGIONAL CENTER INSTRUCTIONS TO TRUSTEE The County of San Diego requested that the Redevelopment Agency, sponsor of the South County Regi ona 1 Center Lease Revenue Bonds, instruct the Trustee to rel ease $90,000 out of excess funds now hel din a reserve account by the trustee in order to replace and relocate an electrical switch gear panel system in the basement area of the Center. Responding to Member McCandliss' question regarding pending litigation, a representative of the County, Mr. Richard L. Schick, stated the litigation is a lawsuit that was filed by Washington Universal, one of the subcontractors on the project. The nature of the cl aim is that the steel door frames were not delivered to the site on time. As a result, the general conditions contractor was required to do additional work. Money was withheld from the general contractor and he is seeking to recover. Member McCandliss asked if the Agency desired to take the balance of the money and put it into an account for superior courts, has an account been establ i shed? Mr. Desrochers responded staff is suggesting that the Board of Supervi sors be asked to consi der thi s. He noted that the money can only be used for the South Bay Regional Center. Member McCandliss clarified the Agency is only releasing the $90,000 requested and the balance is still held. Additional action would be required from the Agency before the balance could be transferred anywhere. Mr. Desrochers responded that is correct. MSUC (Cox/Moore) to accept the report. not present for the vote.) (The vote was 4-0; Member Malcolm was 10. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Michael Cowett, Attorney representing Richard Zogob and One Park, Ltd., addressed the Agency. He referenced a memorandum before the Agency dated May 21, 1987 with regard to the Memorial Park Panhandle. Two letters are attached to that memorandum, one from Mr. Zogob to the Communi ty Development Department, and a letter in response from the Community Development Department. Mr. Desrochers reported the Agency instructed the consultant for Memorial Park to consider the panhandle as part of the entire Master Plan. Mr. Cowett stated One Park is proceeding rapidly to completion. He noted the concern of his client that lack of improvements to the panhandle may affect the leasibility of the project. Respondi ng to Chai rman Cox I s questi on, Mr. Cowett stated the property in questi on wi 11 be dedi cated to the City as parkland when the improvements are completed by the developer. .. ---.---- ---..--------- - .. .. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -5- Hay 21, 1987 Mr. Cowett stated it is that area immedi ately. Department i ndi cated to without City approval. Occupancy may be withheld. Mr. Cowett further stated the Supplemental Disposition and Development Agreement provides that this particular parcel is designated as one parcel. The Redevelopment Agency was to do a plan which would be subject to approval of the developer. The developer would install the improvements and following the installation of improvements the property would be dedicated to the City. There has not been any additi onal requi rements or provi si ons concerni ng the way the panhandle would be developed since this document was executed. The present situation is that the project is ready to open and there is not a plan for the panhandle. The only guidelines that the DDA gives is that there shall be a sidewalk which will be 5-feet wide and landscaping will be compatible with the landscaping on the two residential projects. Mr. Cowett noted that withhol di ng the occupancy permi t because of thi s situati on is i nappropri ate. He suggested having One Park's landscape architect prepare a plan in substanti al accordance with the pl an suggested by Mr. Zogob' s 1 etter. The plan would then be submitted to a responsible party designated by the Agency rather than waiting for the Master Plan. the desire of his client to install improvements in The response 1 etter from the Communi ty Development Mr. Zogob not to go ahead and do the improvements It was also indicated that the Certificate of Member McCandl i ss noted the improvements bei ng descri bed are s imil ar to what had been discussed at a previous mee~ng. The o~y bone of conten~on seems to be the blocking needed for fire protection. Mr. Cowett stated it is the view of the developer that the blocking for fire protection was no longer a requirement following a decision to sprinkle the building. Member Moore commented he feels it is out of line to withhold the occupancy permit. He questioned the need to have fire equipment drive between two buildings when there was not the same requirement when the first building was built (ParkwoodsJ. The City has been derelict in having a late plan. He noted the concern that he did not see security for the residents addressed. This is the most critical aspect in his opinion. Member McCandl i ss asked for additi ona 1 i nformati on on the fi re protecti on issue from staff. Assi stant Communi ty Development Di rector Gustafson stated that he spoke with the Fire Marshal on this date. Her response was that the turf block was required principally for emergency vehicles to have access to get in to rescue people from upper floors of the building and also for bringing water in to fight the fires. On the issue of whether sprinkling the building satisfies those concerns, it wouldn't as far as rescuing people. The Fire Marshall also informed Mr. Gustafson that by Code, a 4-story building would be required to be sprinkled. Assistant City Attorney Rudolf stated that Mr. Cowett has suggested that this is a potential contract dispute that could end up in litigation. Therefore, there is sufficient facts before the Agency to adjourn to closed session and take action with regard to potential litigation. Member Nader pointed out policy decisions need to be made as to what the Agency/City wants for this site before talking about potential litigation. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -6- May 21, 1987 Chai rman Cox stated he was very upset wi th the 1 etter recei ved from Mr. Zogob. Mr. Zogob's letter states the intention of installing the fine arts feature within the enclosed security gate. Chairman Cox would like it to be located where it would have greater public visibility. MSUC (Cox/McCandl i ss) to schedul e di scussi on of thi s item on Tuesday, May 26, 1987, following the City Council meeting. (The vote was 4-0; Member Malcolm was not present for the vote.) Member McCandl i ss stated she agreed wi th Chai rman Cox regardi ng the fi ne arts feature. She further noted the fine arts feature is a beautiful sculpture and the City should do everything possible to maximize the security of it. When the final location is decided upon, she would like to see the security issue addressed. 11. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None 12. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: MSUC (Cox!Hoore) move for closed session to discuss Sierra Club vs. Marsh; Sierra Club VS. Coastal Commission et. al.; and items of potential litigation. (The vote was 4-0; Member Malcolm was not present for the vote.) 13. MEMBERS' COMMENTS: None ADJOURNMENT at 5:30 p.m. to at 6:00 p.m. to Tuesday, May 26, Closed Session. Closed Session adjourned 1987, following the City Council meeting. ¿;j!)L-- Paul G. Desrochers Community Development Director WPC 2956H