Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1987/09/17 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, September 17,1987 4:37 p.m. Council Conference Room Ci ty Hall ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Cox; Members McCandliss and Malcolm Nader, Moore, MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: None Executive Director Goss, Community Development Di rector Desrochers, Assi stant Agency Attorney Rudolf, Assistant Community Development Director Gustafson 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 8/20/87 MSUC (Moore/Nader) approve the minutes of 8/20/87 as submitted. CONSENT CALENDAR Member McCandliss requested Item No.2 be pulled from the Consent Calendar. MEMBER MOORE OFFERED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 3, 4, 5 AND 6, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and adopted. (The vote was 5-0 on Items 3 and 4; 4-1 on Items 5 and 6 with Member Malcolm voting no.) 3. RESOLUTION 861 APPROV ING MASTER LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR SDG&E SOUTH BAY POWER PLANT San Diego Gas and Electric Company submitted a three-phase master 1 andscape p1 an for the enhancement of thei r South Bay Power P1 ant. It was recommended that the Agency approve the plan subject to conditions. 4. RESOLUTION 862 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR "STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON THE EAST SIDE OF BAY BOULEVARD BETWEEN "J" AND "L" STREET IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CA" On September 2, 1987, the Director of Public Works/City Engineer received sealed bids for "Street Improvements on the East Side of Bay Boul evard between "J" Street and" L" Street in the City of Chul a Vi sta, CA." The work to be done in general consists of constructing a curb and gutter along the east side of Bay Boulevard from "L" Street to approximately 2,262 feet north. Staff recommended that the Agency accept the bi ds and award the contract to 0 & B Matthews Constructi on, Inc.-San Diego, in the amount of $41,039.75. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -2- September 17,1987 5. RESOLUTION 863 ACCEPTING CONVEYANCE FROM THE CITY OF GRANT DEED FOR 495 "I" STREET The Redevelopment Agency entered into a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with the Homart Development Company for the expansion and renovation of the Chula Vista Shopping Center. The Boys Club site, located at 495 "I" Street and currently owned by the City, is part of financing and redevelopment plans for the shopping center. Agency control of this parcel is necessary for it to be conveyed to Homart as stipulated in the DDA. 6. RESOLUTION 864 AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO ENTER INTO A COOPERATION AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA The Agency's participation in the Town Centre II Redevelopment Project is predicated upon the City providing the Boys' Club parcel at Fifth and "I" Streets, the closure of Fifth Avenue, and a cash contribution guaranteed by the City's General Fund. The Redevelopment Agency on the other hand is expected to reimburse the City over a period of years as tax increments grow and accumulate. The purpose of this agreement is to create a legal instrument between the Redevelopment Agency and the City so that as tax increments and other sources of funds become available the City will be reimbursed. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR 7. a) RESOLUTION b) RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH COMMUNITY SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR THE PREPARATION AND PROCESSING OF DOCUMENTS FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE TOWN CENTRE I I REDEVELOPMENT PLAN EXPANDING THE PROJECT BOUNDARIES APPROVING A COOPERATION AGREEMENT WITH THE SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR THE SHARING OF COSTS FOR THE PREPARATION OF DOCUMENTS FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE TOWN CENTRE II REDEVELOPMENT PLAN The Agency recently completed an amendment to the Town Centre II Redevelopment Plan allowing for the collection of tax increments from the project area. This amendment was supported by the Sweetwater Union High School District with the understanding that a subsequent amendment wou1 d seek to expand the project boundari es to i nc1 ude school di stri ct properties which may be redeveloped in the near future. The School Di strict agreed to j oi ntly fund the contract wi th Communi ty Systems Associates for the development of plans and documents for this plan amendment. Col11T1unity Development Director Desrochers stated staff is considering that the expanded boundaries would include 10-15 acres of School Di stri ct property (Chul a Vi sta Juni or Hi gh School and Sweetwater Hi gh School Di stri ct Offi ces on Fifth Avenue), and the bal ance woul d be Redevelopment Agency Minutes -3- September 17, 1987 City-owned property (Corporation Yard) or other privately owned properti es. The expanded boundari es wi 11 be determi ned by the Ci ty Council /Redevel opment Agency. If the Ci ty /Agency were to undertake the expansion without the involvement of the School District, the City/Agency would be responsible for approximately 60% of the work entail ed. The proposed contract states that expenses will be split evenly with the School District. Mr. Desrochers further stated that staff proposes to eliminate paragraph 4, Reimbursement of District Costs, in the Cooperation Agreement. Mr. Desrochers suggested adding a clause to paragraph 5.3 in the Cooperati on Agreement as foll ows: "It is further agreed and understood that only those tax increments derived from District properties will be shared between the Agency and the District." Member Nader clarified that findings will need to be made before the Project Area can be expanded. Item 7(a) is a contract with the consultant who will prepare studies upon which a decision will be made as to whether or not fi ndi ngs wi 11 be made for the expansion. Item 7(b), the Cooperation Agreement, seems to have language in it committing the City/Agency to the expansi on. Because the resul ts of the studi es are not known at thi s time, Member Nader suggested the Cooperati on Agreement be cl arifi ed to state: assumi ng the study comes back wi th i nformati on supporti ng fi ndi ng for expansi on, and further assumi ng the Redevelopment Agency makes those fi ndi ngs, then here is how the tax increment will be divided. Member Nader wanted it to be clear that the Agency was not committed to sharing tax increment in the event findings are not made for expansion. Chairman Cox suggested it may be appropriate to refer the contract and Cooperati on Agreement back to staff to work out the concerns that have been discussed. Member McCandliss agreed this item needs to be referred back to staff because the Agreement does not seem to be in the Ci ty' s best interest. She pointed out it appears that the City/Agency has been funding all of the money in the relationship to date. Member McCand1iss further commented that she is comfortable with the idea of only sharing tax increment on the School District property. Member Moore pointed out the Cooperation Agreement is protective of the School District, but not of the City. Member McCand1 i ss noted concern that the Cooperati on Agreement, which appears to be slanted in favor of the School District, was prepared by the same consultant to be hired to do the study pertaining to expansion. She was concerned that the consultant would have the School Di stri ct' s interest as hi s fi rst pri ority and the City's interest as second. She suggested staff reevaluate using this consultant. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -4- September 17, 1987 Responding to Member Malcolm's questions, Mr. Desrochers stated the City/Agency has entered into agreements with the County of San Diego for tax increment sharing in Otay Valley and for the shopping center financing. This is the first time sharing has been considered with the School District. Member Malcolm pointed out the value of property is increased when it is included in a redevelopment project area. He questioned why the tax increment would be shared. Mr. Desrochers stated there has been precedence set throughout the state where tax increment shari ng has occurred between redevelopment agencies and school districts. Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman stated the major impetus to expanding the project area was to assist the School District in financing their new district offices on Third Avenue. Member Malcolm stated he would rather have the tax increment come to the Agency/City. Assi stance in financing possibly could be worked out in another way. MSUC (Moore/McCand1iss) to refer this item (Resolution a and b) back to staff for renegotiating. PUBLIC HEARING 8. PUBLIC HEARING: BIENNIAL REVIEW OF AGENCY'S REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS Section 33348.5 of the State Health and Safety Code (Community Development Law) requires that the Agency hold a public hearing bi enni ally. The purpose of the heari ng is to revi ew and evaluate the progress of each redevelopment project and to hear the testimony of all interested parties. This being the time and place advertised, Chairman Cox declared the public hearing open. Mr. William E. Claycomb, 521 Orange Avenue, #118, Chu1a Vista, di stri buted a copy of a 1 etter to each member whi ch he read into the record. Mr. Claycomb is a resident of Orange Tree Mobi1ehome Park and hi s 1 etter poi nted out concerns regardi ng the purchase of spaces. He suggested the Agency take steps to control the price for additional spaces purchased by residents as an investment. MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) refer Mr. Claycomb's letter to staff. to come back to the Agency. A report is Respondi ng to Member Moore's questions regardi ng the Covenants, Conditi ons and Restri cti ons (CC&R' s) for Orange Tree, Assi stant Community Development Di rector Gustafson stated the CC&R' s were promul gated by Conti nenta 1 Associ ates and adopted by the Acqui si ti on Association. They have been reviewed by City staff as well as by the State. The CC&R's have been compared with the Agreement and no exceptions were found. The Agreement states the purchase of spaces by non-owner occupants would be restricted to one additional space purchase by resi dents. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -5- September l7, 1987 There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Cox/Moore) to accept the report. PULLED ITEMS 2. RESOLUTION 865 DETERMINING THE NECESSITY FOR CONDEMNATION OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 965 "F" STREET WITHIN THE BAYFRONT PROJECT AREA In June 1984, the Agency entered into an agreement with James and El i zabeth Cappos concerni ng thei r property located at the foot of "F" Street within the Bayfront project area. The agreement allowed Mr. and Mrs. Cappos three years to present a plan for development of the property to the Agency for approval. The Agency agreed not to institute eminent domain proceedings during that period which expired on June 30, 1987. No development proposal has been submi tted for the parcel. An offer to purchase has been made with no response. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Agency has until September 30, 1987, to initiate eminent domain proceedings without the owners filing a claim for pre-condemnation damages. The Agency was requested to approve the requi si te resol uti on of necessity so that an emi nent domai n taking may be processed. Responding to Member McCandliss' question, Mr. Desrochers stated the Agency entered into an agreement with Mr. Cappos three years ago whi ch basically took the property off of the market for that time period. The agreement expired June 30 wherein if Mr. Cappos was not able to present a mari na proposal, the Agency wou1 d make an offer to purchase the property. Mr. Cappos has not responded to the offer to purchase. In order to protect the Agency's part of the contract, staff recommends the Agency adopt the resolution initiating the process for eminent domain. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and adopted unanimously. (The vote was 4-0; Member Nader was not present for the vote.) 9. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. 10. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Mr. Desrochers reported that at the Town Centre Project Area Commi ttee meeti ng hel d on thi s date, the members commented that they do not feel it is appropriate for them to continue their service as members inasmuch as they are now required to file conflict of interest statements. They were i niti ally appoi nted to the commi ttee because they had an interest in the project, and at the time State Redevelopment Law suggested that persons being appointed have an interest in the project. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -6- September 17,1987 Assistant City Attorney Rudolf stated the City Attorney's office will be offering guidance and counsel as to what the law means to the project area commi ttee members. Chai rman Cox asked that a copy of the report prepared for the committee members be given to the Redevelopment Agency. 11. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: Chairman Cox suggested his comments follow Members' Comments. 12. MEMBERS' COMMENTS Member Moore referred to the September lO mi nutes of the Town Centre Project Area Committee. He pointed out that when an item comes before the Agency, if it is not acted upon, it takes a vote of all members (not an individual member). He referred the minutes to Mr. Goss for correction. l3. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: a. Local Coastal Program Chai rman Cox col11T1ented that the Ci ty of Chul a Vi sta has put in a great deal of time and effort over the last sixteen years on the Bayfront. There is concern on the part of a number of people as to the lack of accomp1 i shment on those properti es that are under the control of the Ci ty of Chul a Vi sta. Chai rman Cox suggested a three-point approach to try to resolve at least some, and hopefully all, of the impediments the City has had to development of the Bayfront. (1 ) Regarding the CalTrans/Corps of Engineers combined project for 1-5/Route 54/Sweetwater Flood Control Project: 1-5 is again under constructi on and wi 11 be completed but there is nothi ng to guarantee that State Route 54/Sweetwater Flood Control Project will be back on schedule. There is a consultation process presently ongoing; however, once the process is completed there is no guarantee the judgment will be lifted. Part of the reason is the fact that the property owner has not agreed to convey the +178 acres of mitigation lands until some of thei r permits are-issued by the Corps of Engi neers. The Corps of Engi neers has i ndi cated they wi 11 not issue any 404 permits which would allow some development to occur on the Midbayfront unless the EIS is completed. The EIS is still only in the initial stages of completion. Compounding the situati on is the fact that the land is under the ownershi p of Santa Fe Land Improvement Company (Chula Vista Investment Company). At this point, their approach to resolving the problems are not in sync with the Agency's direction. Therefore, in order to try to ensure that the mitigation lands for the CalTrans/Corps project are conveyed i n a reasonab1 e Redevelopment Agency Minutes -7- September 17, 1987 timeframe, Chairman Cox suggested the Redevelopment Agency give direction to staff to negotiate a purchase of all of the lands in the Chula Vista Bayfront that are under the ownership of the Chula Vista Investment Company Joint Venture Agreement. (2) Regardi ng the Si erra Cl ub 1 awsuit agai nst the Coastal Commission's approval of our Local Coastal Program: si gnifi cant changes have occurred in the last three years since approval. In November, 1986, major modifications were adopted. More recently (August 20, 1987) a wi 11 i ngness to consi der addi ti ona1 al ternati ves to the previ ous1y approved plan was i ndi cated. Chai rman Cox suggested that i n order to remove the exi sti ng Si erra Cl ub li ti gati on on the LCP, the City resubmit the Local Coastal Program to the Coastal Commission reflecting the amendments approved in November, 1986; the additional mitigation measures discussed at the August 20, 1987 meeting; go through the entire LCP to clean-up and evaluate where the LCP has been excessively restrictive or presented administrative delays which do not serve environmental or regulatory purposes. (The intent is to include all of the other components of the previous submittal of the LCP.) (3) Chairman Cox stated he wants to guarantee that a high quality hotel with banquet and convention facilities will be built on the Bayfront. At this point, based on previous studies, he is of the opinion that the Gunpowder Point site is the only available site that would accommodate such a facility. However, he is willing to look for alternatives. For example, the original Port District proposal for a second peninsula off of the "J" Street Marina may be a possible site. That may be a superior site to Gunpowder Point. Therefore, Chairman Cox suggested authorizing staff and Agency members to sit down with the Sierra Club and pursue other alternatives that would provide a comparable site for a high quality hotel with appropriate amenities on the Chu1a Vista Bayfront. MS (Cox/Malcolm) (l) Authorize staff to negotiate the purchase of the properties under the ownership of CVIC (the joint venture with Watt Industri es and Santa Fe Land Improvement Company). (2) Gi ve direction to staff to go through the necessary public noticing and preparati on of a new Local Coastal Program; refl ecti ng previ ous amendments; reflecting action from August 20, 1987, meeting; reflecting modifications (clean-up) necessary based upon experience of existing LCP; and (3) Authorize staff and Agency members to contact the Sierra Cl ub and explore other acceptable alternatives for a hotel that woul d meet the criteri a for a qual ity hotel with appropriate amenities. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -8- September 17, 1987 Regarding authorizing staff to purchase the property, Member Malcolm stated he woul d assume the terms and conditi ons woul d be discussed in Closed Session. Member Moore stated he believed it may be more appropriate for the moti on to state that Agency members agreed upon the purchase and direct staff to bring back steps to accomplish the purchase. Member McCand1 i ss poi nted out she does not feel i tis appropri ate at thi s poi nt to make a statement that the Agency i s di recti ng staff to purchase. It would be more appropriate to direct staff to negotiate; set guidelines for negotiations; if guidelines are met then a subsequent motion would be to consummate the purchase. Member Nader suggested changi ng the fi rst poi nt of the moti on to state: Policy Statement: to seek to purchase the Bayfront property for a fai r pri ce and di rect staff to come back wi th a negotiation strategy with intent to purchase. Chairman Cox and Member Malcolm agreed to the suggested change. The motion was amended as follows: MS (Cox/Malcolm) (1) Policy Statement: to seek to purchase the Bayfront property for a fai r pri ce and di rect staff to come back with a negotiation strategy with intent to purchase. (2) Direct staff to prepare a new Local Coastal Program; incorporate previ ously approved amendments; i ncl udi ng exi sti ng el ements of the approved LCP and acknowledging the willingness of the City Council to consi der the alternati ves di scussed at the August 20, 1987 meeting; staff to bring back changes to the LCP that would be of an administrative, clean-up nature. (3) Authorize staff and Agency members to discuss with Sierra Club alternatives to Gunpowder Point as the site for a high quality hotel that would have convention and banquet facilities. Member McCand1 i ss commented she bel i eves attempti ng to acqui re the Bayfront property and bri ngi ng control of the property to the Ci ty is in the best interest of the Ci ty. She further commented she would like the Agency to clearly define the criteria for the hotel for the negoti ati ons with the Si erra C1 ub. She is 1 ooki ng for a high quality, unique hotel. She would not support moving the hotel from Gunpowder Point unless the alternate site was assured. Member Nader commented that if the hotel site was moved to the foot of "F" Street, he believes that replanning of other land uses on the Bayfront wou1 d be advi sab1 e. Member Nader further asked for clarification of the mitigation proposals presented at the August 20, 1987 meeting to be included in the new LCP. He understands the motion to mean it will be left up to staff as to what suggestions from that meeting to include. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -9- September 17, 1987 Chairman Cox stated he believes staff would be working on the previ ously approved 1 and uses, but acknowl edge the fact that the Agency/Council has indicated a willingness to consider other alternatives on the "0" Street Fill. At the time a new LCP comes forth, it will be a good opportunity to determine what suggestions should be included. Regarding relaxation of grading restrictions, Member Nader clarified this would be such as the staff feels is consistent with appropriate environmental considerations. The motion passed unanimously. MSUC (Malcolm/Moore) that Chairman Cox and Member Nader be the negotiating team with the Sierra Club. Member McCand1iss stated a major new direction has been set with regard to the Bayfront. She requested that regul ar reports are presented to the Agency. Improvements to South Levee Road to Gunpowder Point (b) Chairman Cox stated that in July, 1987 City staff submitted a 404 permit application to the Army Corps of Engineers to put in temporary improvements to the south levee road. He pointed out the need for the improvements as soon as possible due to the approachi ng rai ny season and due to the increased uti 1 i zati on of the Nature Interpreti ve Center. He i s very concerned about the existing road condition and the health and safety concerns. He believes it is time to take action. The Corps has not responded to the application. This was followed up with a letter on September 1 explaining concern and time constraints. A response has not been received to the letter. Chai rman Cox bel i eves that the U. S. Fi sh and Wil dl ife Servi ce previ ously issued a non-jeopardy opi ni on when mi nima1 improvements to the south 1 evee road were consi dered over a year ago. Thi s opi ni on was not recei ved by the Ci ty because the permi t was not pursued. He woul d 1 ike to obtai n a copy of thi s opi ni on and utilize it with the Corps of Engineers to force them to take action on the permit request. MSUC (Cox/Malcolm) direct staff to contact the U. S. Fish and Wi 1 d1 ife Servi ce, or appropri ate agency, to determi ne if a non-jeopardy opinion was prepared on the City's previous 404 permit request to the Army Corps of Engi neers for improvements to the south levee road. If such an opinion was prepared, take action to obtain the document as soon as possible under the Freedom of Informati on Act. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -10- September 17, 1987 Member Nader commented he understands that the law requi res the Corps to have acted prior to this time. Could the City legally take the position in a letter that since they did not comply with the statutory time requirements, this would be implied approval of the permit. Mr. Rudolf stated he would look into what the law states. He also noted staff would pursue looking into whether a letter has been written stating the Corps does not have any authority or jurisdiction over the repairs to the road; therefore, the City could move forward to repair the road. Member Malcolm requested staff inform him at a later date of the importance of the Sweetwater Flood Control Project. Chairman Cox requested that a Closed Session be arranged for Tuesday, September 22, 1987, to di scuss the intent to negoti ate a purchase of the Bayfront. ADJOURNMENT at 6:30 p.m. to the regular meeting WPC 3156H