Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1976/08/05 MINUTES OF A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held Thursday August 5, 1976 A regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, California, was held on the above date beginning at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, with the following Members present: Chairman Hamilton, Members Hyde, Egdahl, Hobel Members absent: Member Cox Staff present: Executive Director Cole, Attorney Clifton Reed, Director of Community Development Desrochers, City Attorney Lindberg, Community Development Coordinator Henthorn Chairman Hamilton opened the meeting at 7:37 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES It was moved by Member Egdahl, seconded by Member Hyde and unanimously carried by those present that the minutes of the meeting of July 1, 1976 be approved, copies having been sent to each Member. TOWN CENTRE 2. RESOLUTION NO. 51 - AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO ENTER INTO A NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT WITH JOHN S. GRIFFITH & COMPANY Conflict of interest - Special Counsel Reed stated that, on a conservative Chairman point of view and in terms of the Political Reform Act of 1974, the Chairman should not participate in any of the proceedings involving the Town Centre project. It is his advice that the Chairman relinquish his chair and not discuss this matter before the Agency tonight because there is a potential conflict of interest. In answer to Member Hobel's query, Attorney Reed ex- plained that he is talking about this particular matter tonight and not the entire Town Centre project. He will rule on the Chairman's conflict of interest on a case to case basis. As to this particular matter before the Agency, the Chairman owns property that is fairly close to the subject area and any decision made tonight could have an impact on the Chairman's financial interest. Chairman Hamilton relinquished his chair to Chairman Pro Tempore Hyde at this time, and then left the Council Chamber. -158- Redevelopment Agency Meeting August 5, 1976 Report by Community Community Development Director Desrochers explained Development Director that the firm of John S. Griffith & Company of Irvine, California has indicated its desirability to negotiate with the City for the redevelopment of 15 to 18 acres of the property located between Third and Fourth Avenues, "F" Street to Memorial Park. The agreement before the Agency is for the right to negotiate exclusively with the developer for a period of 120 days. Exhibit No. 2 Submitted for the record was Exhibit No. 2 - the consolidated financial statements of John S. Griffith & Company for the year ending April 30, 1976. Exhibit No. 3 Also submitted was a brief history documentation of the John S. Griffith & Company noted as Exhibit No. 3. Evidence of Good Faith Mr. Desrochers added that a check in the amount of $10,000 payable to the City of Chula Vista was delivered today as evidence of good faith relative to this agree- ment. This check has been deposited and the letter of credit will be forthcoming. Tom Schriber Mr. Schriber explained that his company is involved Vice President because they feel Chula Vista has a definite potential John S. Griffith & Company of attracting one or a number of major users into the Downtown area. Daniel Donahue Mr. Donahue showed a slide presentation of shopping President centers constructed by his company. John S. Griffith & Company In answer to the Agency's inquiries, Mr. Donahue commented that his company has been involved in this same type agreement with other cities. In the 120 days, the negotiations with the shopping center tenants are generally "handshakes" because in 120 days, it is impossible to negotiate a lease and/or purchase. 120 day negotiation Mr. Donahue explained what transpires in the 120 days: agreement working with the City staff to determine the type of shopping center best suited for this City; working with the Planners for design; working with major tenants with the Planners' information; working with the tax incre- ment element; and determining how may acres will be needed and how much square footage will be built. Businesses in the area Member Hobel questioned what would happen to the busi- nesses in this area. Mr. Donahue said that under the Redevelopment Law, these businesses have the preferen- tial right to come back into the development. His company representatives will meet with each and every one of the businessmen in this area to discuss their desires and preferential rights. -159- ...--" Redevelopment Agency Meeting August 5, 1976 Preliminary Layout Mr. Schriber submitted a preliminary layout of the proposal showing three major tenants: a department store, drug store and market that have indicated their interest in this site. As to the property now under moratorium, (Zogob's property south of Center Street 300 block, east of Fourth Avenue) this proposal includes the property in order to create the impact or desire of the project. Gruens' reactions Community Development Director Desrochers explained that the consultants stressed that convenience goods should still remain in the Downtown area. They did talk about specialty shops; however, at the time they made their report, they did not feel there was enough acreage for a major retailer. Mr. Desrochers added that he informed the Gruens of this proposal, and the Gruens indicated it was "beyond their fondest expecta- tions" for the area and are enthused about the prospect. Mrs. Gruen is concerned with one fact - the relationship of the major store to the balance of the Third Avenue area. Otherwise, in the Gruens' opinion, this project should help the specialty shops along Third Avenue and encourage more diversification than what exists now. Disposition and Development Mr. Desrochers remarked that at the end of the 120 day Agreement period, it is anticipated the City would enter into a Disposition and Development Agreement. He recommended that the firms of Gruen, Gruen & Associates and Stone & Youngberg have a big part, if the agreement were approved in the next 30 to 60 days, to preliminary respond to the facts and figures. Confidential Report In answer to Chairman Pro Tempore Hyde's inquiry, Mr. Schriber stated that they will submit to the Agency the persons, firms or entities that the developer antici- pates will become key tenants of the proposed project. Agency comments Mr. Schriber, in answer to the questions posed, stated he is familiar with the Town Centre Project Redevelop- ment Plan. Mr. Schriber informed the Agency that it was not the Griffith Company coming to the Agency and saying, "We want this property and we want to develop it this way -- it is a merger -- redevelopment does not work in any other way . . . We will be working with staff and the Agency on a daily basis and advising them of what's going on." If it doesn't meet the Agency's criteria, the Agency does not have to approve the proposal. Chairman Pro Tempore Hyde asked if the developers were aware of the architectural control zone in this area. Mr. Schriber stated they were. -160- Redevelopment Agency Meeting August 5, 1976 Town Centre Project Mr. Desrochers reported to the Agency that the Committee Committee met this morning and after discussing the proposal at length, unanimously recommended its approval. Milo Berenson Mr. Berenson said he was one of the owners of the acreage this project is proposed for. He built this "service" shopping center 12 years ago spending a great deal of time to find out what businesses would be successful here. This center is 1-1/2 miles from a major shopping center. Mr. Berenson commented that he would not like to stand in the way of progress but would like to be assured that a project of this magni- tude is needed in this area. Richard Zogob Mr. Zogob said he had nothing to say at this time. His comments on this subject were made to the Council at the meeting held July 30, 1976. Progress reports Member Hobel expressed his desire to receive a weekly progress report. Resolution offered Offered by Member Hyde, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent of those present, passed and adopted by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Hyde, Egdahl, Hobel Noes: None Absent: Members Cox, Hamilton (Chairman Hamilton did not participate due to a pos- sible conflict of interest). Recess A recess was called at 8:53 p.m. and the meeting re- convened at 9:05 p.m. Chairman Pro Tempore Hyde asked for a progress report in one week. 3. LETTERS FROM MRS. MOORE Two letters were received from Mrs. Kathryn Moore, 1134 Tobias Drive, Chula Vista. (1) P recommendation that the Town Centre project be opened up to the community (amateurs and profession- als alike) to submit plans for redevelopment with a price of $1,000 to '$5,000 for the winning entry. Mr. Desrochers stated in his report to the Agency that Senior Planner Dan Pass is in the final stages now of the professional draft design plan and it would not be in the best interest of the project to delay the process any further. _161- Redevelopment Agency Meeting August 5, 1976 (2) The second letter from Mrs. Moore concerned the property to be developed by Mr. Richard Zogob (south side of Center Street east of Fourth Avenue) on which the Council placed a moratorium pending consideration of the plans from the Griffith Company. Mrs. Moore spoke on behalf of Mr. Zogob stating the Council's action was premature and runs "ruffshod" over Mr. Zogob. Letters received Chairman Pro Tempore Hyde noted that the Agency members for the record along with the press, have received copies of the letters and asked that the contents of the letter be entered into the minutes of this meeting. 4. RESOLUTION NO. 52 - On May 6, 1976 the City Council approved the budget ACCEPTING LOAN FROM THE request (Fund No. 240, Activity No. 2400) for the Town CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND Centre Project. This budget does not include funding ADOPTING THE TOWN CENTRE for capital improvements -- this will be developed by FISCAL YEAR 1976-77 BUDGET staff and presented to the Agency for consideration in the next few months. Resolution offered Offered by Member Egdahl, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent of those present, passed and adopted by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Egdahl, Hobel, Hyde Noes: None Absent: Members Cox, Hamilton (Chairman Hamilton was absent due to a possible conflict of interest). Chairman resumes chair Chairman Hamilton resumed his chair at this time. 5. RESOLUTION NO. 53 - Section 33348.5 of the Health and Safety Code requires SETTING OCTOBER 7, 1976 that the Agency hold a public hearing biennially for AT 7:30 P.M. IN THE CITY the purpose of review~ng the Redevelopment Plan for COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 276 each project within its jurisdiction and evaluating its FOURTH AVENUE AS THE TIME progress. AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PURPOSE The requirements for the public hearing are as follows: OF MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 33348.5 OF THE September 2: Notices posted at four prominent places HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE within the project area; first publication (COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT of notice. LAW) September 9: Posting continues: second publication of notice. September 16: Posting continues; third and final publication of notice. September 22: Notice/posting period complete (law re- quires completing 10 days prior to date of hearing. -162- Redevelopment Agency Meeting August 5, 1976 Resolution offered Offered by Member Egdahl, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent of those present, passed and adopted by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Egdahl, Hobel, Hyde, Hamilton Noes: None Absent: Member Cox 6. REPORT OF CONSULTANTS: In a written statement to the Agency, Community Development STATUS OF WORK Director DesrocheIs reported that both the engineering and economic/marketing consultants have refined their work as a result of the last Agency meeting. No major conclusion or findings have been altered as a result of their collaboration. The Attorney will go over the report, the City printer will print it, and the Agency should receive it in one week. Report accepted It was moved by Member Hobel, seconded by Member Hyde and unanimously carried by those present that the report be accepted. Letters to potential Mr. Desrochers commented that in regard to the develop- developers ment research for the bayfront project, after discussion with the consultants (Gruens), Urban Land Institute services have been utilized and prominent names in the field of residential and resort development have been received. A letter has been prepared to these people to ascertain their interest in the bayfront project. Agency discussion Discussion ensued as to the economic impact of Route regarding Route 54 54's cancellation for at least six years. Mr. Desrochers noted it was a basic element of the program; however, the City is still eligible for the money for Tidelands or a frontage road - that would eventually connect to Route 54. 7. REPORT OF ASSIGNMENT OF As of July 1, 1976 the San Diego office of the firm of FEES FROM WILSEY & HAM TO Wilsey & Ham has separated from the parent company and PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTANTS became a new entity: Project Design Consultants, which retains the same staff and will complete the work of the bayfront project under the same terms and conditions of the agreement as with Wilsey & Ham. Report accepted It was moved by Member Hyde, seconded by Member Egdahl and unanimously carried by those present that the report be accepted and the Agency Treasurer be directed to remit payment of fees to the Project Design Consultants. 8. STATUS REPORTS: In a written report to Agency, Community Development COASTAL COMMISSION CORPS Director Desrochers submitted the status reports: OF ENGINEERS LEGISLATION. -163- Redevelopment Agency Meeting August 5, 1976 Coastal Commission: The Agency staff is refining a position paper to be presented to the Regional and State Commission as the final portion of efforts to obtain State certification of the Bayfront Plan. Sweetwater River Flood Control Channel/Route 54: Staff has been in contact with the Corps of Engineers regarding the flood control channel project urging timely completion of the Environmental Statement. At this time, the rec- reational development portion of the proposed project is being reformulated. Legislation: Submitted with the Agency report was the League of California Cities analysis and recommendations regarding the following bills: SB 1227 - Coastal Legis- lation; AB 15 - Prime Agricultural Land Preservation; and the Montoya Redevelopment Package Bills. Special Counsel Reed reported on the latest developments of the Montoya Bills. Report accepted It was moved by Member Egdahl, seconded by Member Hyde and unanimously carried by those present that the report be accepted. 9. QUARTERLY REPORT - A report was presented to the Council delineating the AGENCY SPECIAL COUNSEL man hours of Special Counsel Reed for the months of April, May and June 1976. Report accepted It was moved by Member Hobel, seconded by Member Egdahl and unanimously carried by those present that the report be accepted. 10. RESOLUTION NO. 54 - At its meeting of May 6, 1976 the Agency Secretary DESIGNATING THE DIRECTOR presented a letter of resignation to the Agency. The OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Executive Director recommended that the Director of AS SECRETARY TO THE Community Development be designated as the Secretary AGENCY to the Agency. Resolution offered Offered by Member Hyde, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent of those present, passed and adopted by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: Members Hyde, Hamilton, Egdahl, Hobel Noes: None Absent: Member Cox GRUENS' CONTRACT It was moved by Member Hobel and seconded by Member Hyde that the staff be directed to contact the Gruens in regard to obtaining a minimum fee structure for liaison services as this moves into the 120 day period (contract with John S. Griffith & Company) since the -164- Redevelopment Agency Meeting August 5, 1976 Gruens were a key factor on the front end of this project. The staff is to come back with this proposal for Agency consideration. Discussion of motion Community Development Director Desrochers commented that the firm of Stone & Youngberg will give the Agency a letter agreement stating they will do the services and will be reimbursed upon the sale of bonds. Special Counsel advised the Agency to authorize the Executive Director to obtain such a letter. Included in motion Member Hobel amended his motion to include the recom- mendation of Special Counsel; Member Hyde agreed to the second and the motion carried unanimously by those present. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Chairman Hamilton adjourned the Redevelopment Agency MEETING ADJOURNED meeting at 9:22 p.m. to the meeting scheduled for September 2, 1976. ~~;J ~¿~~/ r/ Se retary -165-