The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutrda min 1987/12/17 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, December 17, 1987 4:32 p.m. Council Conference Room citv Hall ROLL CALL: MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Cox; Members Nader, Malcolm, Moore and McCandliss MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Executive Director Goss, Community Development Director Desrochers, Assistant City Attorney Rudolf, Assistant community Development Director Gustafson, Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 12/3/87 MSUC (McCandliss/cox) submitted. approve the minutes of 12/3/87 as CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 2 through 6) Items 2,5 and 6 were pulled from the Consent Calendar. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 3 AND 4 WERE OFFERED BY MEMBER NADER, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. 3. RESOLUTION 890 APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH LEE C. JOHNSON CO. FOR A RE-USE APPRAISAL OF 350, 360, 364 AND 368 BAY BOULEVARD AND APPROPRIA'I'- ING FUNDS THEREFOR Pursuant to state law, prior to the Redevelopment Agency disposing of property, a re-use appraisal is required to establish the property's use value. The appraisal firm of Lee C. Johnson Co. submitted a proposal for appraising the four Bay Boulevard properties located at 350, 360, 364, and 368, purchased by the Agency in 1986. 4. RESOLUTION 891 APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH MURRAY ALLISON & ASSOCIATES FOR A RE-USE APPRAISAL OF 321 "H" STREET Pursuant to State law, prior to the Redevelopment Agency selling property, a re-use appraisal is required to establish the parcel's re-use value. The appraisal firm of Redevelopment Agency Minutes -2- December '17, 1987 Murray Allison & Associates appraising 321 "H" street. submitted a proposal for END OF CONSENT CALENDAR PULLED ITEMS 2 . RESOLUTION 892 APPROVING THE EXTENSION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH SAN DIEGO SHIPBUILDING AND REPAIR, INC. FOR LEASE OF PROPERTY AT 980 "F" STREET For the past four years San Diego has leased Agency-owned property at This site has been utilized for marine-related uses. The current January 31, 1988. Shipbuilding and Repair the foot of "F" Street. shipbuilding and other lease agreement expires Chairman Cox suggested a six month lease versus a one year lease may be more appropriate. He would like the Agency to have more flexibility in the event there is the opportunity to pursue development of the Bayfront. MS (Cox/McCandliss) move to modify the lease; the lease to have an extension of six months instead of one year. Member Malcolm questioned if Mr. Gurnee of San Diego Shipbuilding & Repair would have a concern with this change. If the proposed modification in the lease would cause the Agency to lose the tenant, then he could not support the change. He felt it would not be in the best interest of the City/Agency to lose the income from this property. Community Development Director Desrochers stated a six month lease was provided last year. Mr. Desrochers further noted the one year lease was proposed because it appears it may be a year before the property will be needed by the Agency. Member McCandliss pointed out that unless Mr. Gurnee comes back to the Agency and states that a six month lease is unacceptable, she does not believe the Agency would be denying the City anything by enhancing the Agency's flexibility. The motion failed. The vote was 2-3; Members Nader, Malcolm and Moore voting no. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MOORE, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved. (The vote was 4-1; Chairman Cox voting no.) -' ~edevelopment Agency Minutes -3- December 17, 1987 5. RESOLUTION 893 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN HOMART, THE AGENCY AND THE SWEETWATER AUTHORITY REGARDING WATER FACILITIES AT THE CHULA VISTA SHOPPING CENTER The Agency was requested to enter into an agreement with Homart and the Sweetwater Authority concerning the provision of a new water system at the Chula vista Shopping Center. The purpose of the new system is to replace the old system which lies in the site of the foundation for the expanded Center. The Agency involvement in the Agreement is to guarantee that the easements for the water facilities will be delivered to the Sweetwater Authority at a future date. Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman reported the Sweetwater Authority required the easements to be in hand before they will approve switching over to the new system. If the contract is not signed and approved by the Sweetwater Authority, Homart would have to keep the old system activated and that would slow down their work on thè expansion of the Center. The Redevelopment Agency is being asked to guarantee that the easements will be delivered to Sweetwater Authority by stating that the Agency will use its power of eminent domain if Homart is unable to deliver the easements. This has already been stated in the Disposition and Development Agreement. Homart will reimburse the Agency for any expenses incurred for using the power of eminent domain. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN COX, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent. Responding to Member Malcolm's questions, Mr. Kassman stated Homart is responsible for the continued maintenance of the system until the easements are delivered. It is the Sweetwater Authority who is requesting the letter of credit from Homart, the City/Agency is not involved. The resolution was passed and approved unanimouslv. 6. REPORT: STATUS OF AGENCY PURCHASE OF UNSOLD SPACES AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK On September 18, 1986, the Agency agreed to purchase all remaining spaces at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park following the 90-day option-to-purchase period. The gO-day period ended on November 3. However, the low income loans have not yet closed. Once these loans close, the Agency will be able to determine the exact number of unsold spaces and will be in a position to purchase these remaining spaces. Member Moore noted concern that if the Agency purchased a space that included a coach, a scenario has not been Redevelopment Agency Minutes -4- December ~7, 1987 àddressed for the removal of the coach to allow a potential purchaser of the space to put their own coach on the space. Assistant Community Development Director Desrochers requested a response from the Agency regarding the summary of recommendations in the report. He stated basically staff is seeking the Agency's endorsement for staff to proceed with arranging the financing with Bank of America; management with Tyco Management Company; pursuing the incremental raise of rent; and the "sell-together" issue. Member Moore requested that when this item is brought back to the Agency for final approval in January, he would like to have the issue addressed which he discussed previously. He noted this could be one way of expediting sales, allowing the cost of the space(s) to be reimbursed to the Agency. Member Malcolm questioned why a loan was being taken out instead of using Redevelopment Agency funds. Mr. Gustafson stated the low and moderate income account would be depleted if these funds were used; staff was wanting to preserve flexibility in case funds were needed for the relocation mobilehome park or the neighborhood revitalization program anticipated for Montgomery, or any other proj ect that may come up (rather than tie up all the funds in one project). Mr. William Claycomb, 521 Orange Avenue, #118, Chula vista addressed the Agency regarding figures pertaining to what the renters will be paying at Orange Tree. He referenced a letter he sent to the Agency dated December 10, 1987. Staff noted this letter was not received in time to be submitted to the Agency for this meeting. This letter will be addressed at the next Agency meeting. MSUC (Malcolm/Moore) move to accept the report. 7. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. 8. DIRECTOR'S REPORT None. 9. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT a. Bayfront Mediation Process Chairman Cox reported the Redevelopment Agency met in closed session prior to the beginning of the public portion of this meeting and considered whether or not they would be willing to participate in a mediation process that has been suggested by the federal defendants in the Sierra Club vs. Marsh litigation. By action of the Redevelopment Agency, it ,Redevf,! 1 opment Agency Mi nutes -5- December 17, 1987 was unanimously agreed to pursue the mediation process with the other participants in the litigation. 10. MEMBERS' COMMENTS None. ADJOURNMENT at 5:05 p.m. to the regular meeting of January 7, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. p~rW~ Community Development Director