Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1988/11/17 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, November 17, 1988 4:10 p.m. Council Conference Room City Hall ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Cox; Members McCandliss, Nader and Moore MEMBERS ABSENT: Member Malcolm STAFF PRESENT: Executi ve Di rector Goss, Community Development Director Desrochers, Agency Attorney Harron, Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman, Principal Community Development Specialist Putnam, Senior Community Development Specialist Buchan 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 10/04/88 and 11/01/88 MSUC (Cox/Moore) approve the minutes of 10/4/88 and 11/1/88 as submitted. (Member McCandliss abstained from voting on the minutes for 10/4/88 and Member Moore abstained from voting on the minutes for 11/1/88.) CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 2 through 4) All items were pulled from the Consent Calendar. END OF CONSENT CALENDAR 5. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT BY THE NEW HARVEST CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP TO LOCATE A CHURCH AT 221-225 THIRD AVENUE RESOLUTION ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION ISSUED UNDER IS-88-23 AND DENYING A REQUEST BY THE NEW HARVEST CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP TO LOCATE A CHURCH AT 221-225 THIRD AVENUE Discussion of this item was trailed pending arrival of representatives from the New Harvest Christian Fellowship. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. PULLED ITEMS 2. REPORT: CONCEPTUAL PROPOSAL FOR MARINA GATEWAY PARCELS 2, 3 AND 4 Ratner Development Company has been in the process of devel opi ng pl ans for Marina Gateway Parcels 2, 3 and 4. In May 1987, Greenwald/McDonald Company, representatives of the property owner, received conceptual approval from the Redevelopment Agency Minutes -2- November 17,1988 Agency of a proposal to improve and utilize the drainage channels adjacent to parcels 2, 3 and 4. The property owner submitted a revised concept plan for all three sites which includes increased intensity of development, drainage channel improvements and a public financing program through an acquisition and assessment district to construct the improvements. It was recommended that the Agency accept the report and: 1. Approve Ratner Development Company's concept for the development of Marina Gateway Parcels 2, 3 and 4; 2. Direct staff to forward the proposed LCP amendment to the City Council; and 3. Di rect staff to work wi th the property owner to further de vel op the acquisition/assessment district and development plan for the sites. Seni or Communi ty Development Speci al i st Buchan reported that through the LCP amendment for the land use intensity, the developer and architect have worked out a set of condi ti ons; gi ven those condi ti ons, the Pl anni ng Department recommends the concept of the LCP amendment. Princi pa 1 Pl anner Lee stated staff has been working with the applicant to develop the set of criteria which increases the setback along the street frontages as well as the intersection, and the requirement for building articulation. Member McCandliss noted concern with bulk and view lines. Mr. Lee pointed out there will be a limited building coverage on the property and that is why the developer is able to adhere to the substantial increase in setbacks in order to keep view lines open. Member McCandl i ss poi nted out there is a 1 i st of acti ons that wi 11 need to take place in order to allow for this development. She questioned if this would be precedent setting for the rest of the Bayfront. Mr. Lee stated these properties are relatively small and isolated adjacent to the freeway. This is the entry to the Mari na. There are a number of thi ngs that need to be addressed at this particular intersection that are unique to other parts of the Bayfront where there are larger blocks of property. MS (COX/NADER) to accept staff recommendation. Responding to Member Moore's questions, Ms. Buchan stated the existing height limitation on this site is two stories. Directly across the street the height limitation is four stories. The LCP amendment would allow up to four stories and a maximum up to .5 FAR dependent upon the developer meeting the design criteria in their specific development. Mr. Lee stated a typical setback in the Bayfront is between 20 - 25 feet. Larger setbacks are being proposed along the street in this development as well as at the intersection. The motion passed unanimously. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -3- November 17,1988 3. REPORT: DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY On June 16, 1988, the Redevelopment Agency requested staff prepare a comprehensive report detail ing the number and occupancy level s of downtown park i ng spaces, the cost and revenues associ ated with the pub 1 i c park i ng program, and the potenti al for deck i ng downtown park i ng lots. In July and August of this year, staff undertook studies of downtown parking usage and updated the 1984 employee park i ng survey to determi ne current park i ng habits of employees in the downtown area. In addition, selected areas were surveyed before and after the opening of the Social Security Office at 396 Third Avenue in order to determine the impact upon parking demand of the new facility. It was recommended that the Agency accept the report and authorize staff to: 1. Continue with efforts to improve signage in the Downtown Area i denti fyi ng the 1 ocati on of the park i ng structure and short-term parking lots. 2. Work with the Chamber, Downtown Committee, and local business leaders to estab 1 i sh an employee parking program to redi rect employees to less utilized, long-term parking lots and to utilize public transportation. 3. To further study revi s i on of the i n-l i eu park i ng fee program to promote development in under-developed areas and limit further impact in congested areas. 4. Evaluate the need, during budget review, for an additional full-time parking enforcement officer. Cha i rman Cox commented he bel i eves there may be val ue in work i ng with the property owner of the Leader to have the Agency acqui re the park i ng lot for metered parking under the condition that whatever proceeds are realized would be spent specifically in renovating that building. He also commented that by consolidating parking lots, a better yield of parking spaces would be possible. The Agency should look at maximizing the existing parking lots so that there would be greater flexibility in the future to go to either decking, if necessary, or have the opportunity to redevelop some of the parcels. Member McCandl iss stated she bel ieves the Agency should begin to look for decking opportunities and more parking per area. At this time there is a segmented parking arrangement; it would be possible to get more parking by consolidating lots and decking. Chairman Cox suggested the City take the initiative in encouraging employees to park in certain areas. Member Moore asked about the i n-l i eu park i ng fee. program has been under criticism from time to time. there are some areas in the downtown that need Mr. Kassman stated the Staff is suggesting that stimulation in terms of Redevelopment Agency Minutes -4- November 17, 1988 additional redevelopment; an in lieu parking fee that would help people to redevelop in that area mi ght be hel pful and promote 1 arger scal e redevelopment. It may be desirable to discourage use of the in lieu parking fee in the areas that are congested at this time. Member Moore commented he woul d prefer $11,000 - $15,000 per parking space. City/Agency move in that direction. ~'ember Moore stated it woul d be di ffi cult for him to support an addi ti ona 1 parking enforcement officer. He suggested evaluating where the existing parking enforcement officers are spending their time. to subsi di ze transit rather than pay He believes it is time that the MSUC (Cox/Moore) accept the report. MS (McCandl i ss/Cox) staff be di rected to study the feas i bil ity of deck i ng downtown parki ng lots in a reasonable peri od of time and report back to the Agency. Mr. Goss suggested modifying the motion stating that the next time a parcel is brought before the Agency for purchase, that at that time a report be brought back as to whether it would be cost effective to start considering decking as opposed to purchasing the parcel. Member McCandliss modified her motion to reflect the suggested change. The motion passed unanimously. MS (Moore/Nader) direct staff to pursue a program of subsidizing transit ridership in conjunction with employers (based upon subsidizing employees ridership to and from work). This would be an Agency/employer subsidy; 50/50 spl it. Member Nader suggested working with downtown businesses to encourage transit ridership for customers by considering a program where businesses make coupons available on transit vehicles. When a customer rides a bus, he/she receives a coupon that would be worth a discount at downtown businesses. Member Nader al so suggested consulting with downtown businesses regarding making some sort of consumer incentives available at their place of business to people who show a bus receipt or transit pass. The motion passed unanimously. MSUC (Cox/Moore) give policy direction to staff to come back to the Agency with any parcels that may be available for sale that are one or two parcels removed from existing City parking lots (or adjoining). MSC (Nader/McCandliss) direct staff to contact the Downtown Business Association and explore possible ways of creating greater consumer incentives for use of public transit to come downtown, including the use of business Redevelopment Agency Minutes -5- November 17, 1988 coupons or any other incentives that staff or the business community would like to explore. (The motion was approved; the vote was 3-0; Chairman Cox was not present for the vote.) 4. REPORT ON THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING PROJECT On July 26, 1988, the Redevelopment Agency approved guidelines for the design of Otay Valley Road. Two of those guidelines required further information to be developed for presentation to the Agency so that a decision could be made on the roadway alignment. Four alternative roadway alignments for the segment of Otay Valley Road from just west of the Animal Shel ter to the intersection of Otay Valley Road and Nirvana were developed in an effort to provide detailed options for the retention and/or partial reconstruction of the Animal Shelter and the location of the future centerline of Otay Valley Road immediately east of the Animal Shelter. It was recommended that the Agency (l) adopt Alternative 2 as the al ignment for Otay Valley Road between the Animal Shelter and Nirvana subject to further environmental review; and (2) approve in concept a proposed City Council agreement with Girard Financial for posting the appraised value of the additional property required south of Otay Valley Road plus a contingency. Responding to Member Moore's questions, Mr. Goss stated what is being proposed is an interim reconfiguration of the Animal Shelter. The Shelter is not large enough for future use and there are al so structural problems. The ultimate plan is to put the Animal Shelter in the new Corporation Yard. Responding to Member McCandl iss' questions regarding safety issues, Principal Community Development Specialist Putnam stated the only problem area is Alternative 1 in which the site distance would be impaired. In this case the desi gn speed woul d be reduced to 50 mph instead of 55 mph). It woul d al so narrow the sidewalk. It is possible to do this, it is not a recommended alternative for a major arterial. Member McCandliss commented it appears as though staff has worked very hard to keep the Girard site buildable. Will any costs associated with configuring the street to insure that the Girard site is buildable be borne by Girard Financial? Ms. Putnam stated Girard Financial had proceeded a long way in getting their site plan approval; they have a really difficult site. To take additional property from them would probably make development of their site almost infeasible based on the price they paid for the property. Staff wanted to try to accommodate them. An appraisal was prepared and Girard Financial agreed to post $85,000 plus a contingency. All the interest will accrue to the Agency until the property is acquired. Mr. Kassman stated the Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee considered this report and recommended Agency approval of Alternative #2. The only concern was that they felt the price of the land would go beyond the appraised value of the land. They recommended that if the Agency chooses Alternative 2, that Redevelopment Agency Minutes -6- November 17, 1988 they move forward as quickly as possible so as not to allow the land to inflate in value and that they set a limit to the maximum dollar amount that would be subsidizing the purchase of the land. MSUC (McCandliss/Moore) accept staff recommendation. PUBLIC HEARING 5. PUBLIC HEARING: REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT BY THE NH! HARVEST CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP TO LOCATE A CHURCH AT 221-225 THIRD AVENUE RESOLUTION ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION ISSUED UNDER IS-88-23 AND DENYING A REQUEST BY THE NEW HARVEST CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP TO LOCATE A CHURCH AT 221-225 THIRD AVENUE The New Harvest Christian Fellowship requested to lease the property located at 221-225 Third Avenue (known as the Leader Building). The Church would use the entire 14,000 sq. ft. for Bible classes during the week and services on the weekends. The proposed use of thi s commerci a 1 structure in the Town Centre I Redevelopment Project Area requires the granting of a special permit by the Redevelopment Agency. Mr. Kassman reported representatives of the church were not present and suggested continuing this item to the next Agency meeting. MS (McCandliss/Nader) to continue this item to the next evening meeting of the Redevelopment Agency. Mr. Tom Money, Money Realty, 355 Third Avenue, Suite 101, Chula Vista, addressed the Agency and requested the Agency hear comments from property owners who were present at this meeting in case they were not able to attend at a future date. The motion was withdrawn. Chairman Cox declared the public hearing open. Mr. Money commented he manages a number of properties on Third Avenue. He is representing himself, partnerships that he is a principal in, and Mr. Hirshman who owns the property at 231 Third Avenue. It is their feel ing that this would be a misuse of the proposed site. He pointed out this is a commercial area; the commerci a 1 bus i nesses in the area survive by the synergy that is created by other businesses. He noted concern that the owner of the property is not interested in improving the property or making it more desirable for someone to use it. Mr. Carmel Botte, owner of the property immediately to the north of the subject property, stated he believes the people who will attend the church will not be coming downtown to shop. Downtown Chula Vista is not a place for Redevelopment Agency Minutes -7- November 17, 1988 a church. Redevelopment funds have been spent on purchasing parking places; the church wi 11 use these park i ng pl aces but will not provi de the revenues that are needed and wanted for downtown Chula Vista. A representati ve of the House of Muni ch located at 230 Thi rd Avenue, Chul a Vista, noted concern about the laws which state alcoholic beverages cannot be sold within a certain distance of a church. Agency Attorney Harron stated that because the House of Munich has a pre-existing license to sell alcohol, it would not be effected by the location of a church across the street. Responding further to Member Nader's questions, Mr. Harron stated he is not aware of anything in the Redevelopment Plan that would give the church that kind of influence over decisions involving alcohol. Member Nader stated he would like to know if the Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC), a state agency, would have any rule which would allow the church to protest the sale of alcohol. If there is, could the Agency make it a condition that the church waive any right to protest an alcohol beverage license within the Redevelopment Area? Mr. Harron stated the Agency could make it a condi ti on; the questi on is whether or not the ABC woul d recogni ze the condition or be bound by it. MSUC (Cox/Moore) to continue this public hearing to Tuesday, November 22, 1988 following the City Council meeting. Member Nader asked that staff address the issue of a more appropriate location for the church. He would like more specifics as to what the available sites are. Member McCandliss asked that Director of Planning Krempl be available at the meeting on November 22 to discuss the issue of locating churches in the City. Member Nader stated he would al so 1 ike more specific information on what improvements the applicant is committed to in the event the Agency grants the speci al permit. Chairman Cox suggested he present his Chairman's Report at this time, noting he would need to leave the meeting shortly. 8. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: a. Chai rman Cox referred to the 1 ibrary fountai n area and the cost involved in the maintenance. It was his intent in referring this matter to staff that whatever costs are associated with the 1 ibrary fountain area with regard to labor and material be paid for by the City. MSUC (Cox/McCandl iss) refer this item back to the Downtown Business Association and to staff, noting that the costs associated with the Redevelopment Agency Minutes -8- November 17, 1988 library fountain area would be paid by the City; also staff to do an analysis on whether it is more cost effective for the City to provide for the maintenance in another manner. b. MSUC (Cox/McCandliss) refer to staff to look into problems of broken Bomanite on Third Avenue and F Street. c. Chairman Cox asked that the Agency Attorney prepare a memorandum concerning outstanding litigation on the Bayfront (including the status of the Trolley Station). 6. PRESENTATION: MIDBAYFRONT PLANNING CONCEPT The developer (Chula Vista Investors) hired Jerde Partnership of Los Angeles to develop a concept plan. The plan was first presented to staff on November 8, 1988. The overall plan reflects the goals of the Agency as expressed in the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement and the initial planning workshop on the Midbayfront held on July 14, 1988. ~1r. William Barkett of Chula Vista Investors (CV!) addressed the Agency. He brought the Agency up-to-date on the status of Rohr Industries' purchase of property from CVI. He stated the transaction has been worked out ~Iith the Coastal Commission and CVI's attorneys are presently drafting documents. It is CV I' s desire to close the transacti on by the end of the month. Al so, regardi ng the cl ean-up of Gunpowder Poi nt, CV I had a meeti ng wi th pri son officials regarding hiring people to do the clean-up. An agreement was received on this date from a private party to clean-up metal/scrap materials. Mr. Barkett commented that he and his associates have establ ished a relationship with the Radisson Group, a $5 billion privately-held company based out of Minneapolis. They are adding a new hotel to their chain at the rate of one every ni ne days. They have two aspects of thei r company; one is hotel rooms and one is travel. They are the 1 argest mover of peopl e in the western hemisphere; the second largest in the world. Radisson desired a 26-story height in the design of the hotels for the Bayfront. Mr. Barkett further noted the plan has 150,000 sq. ft. of commercial retail space, 1800 hotel rooms, 2200 apartments, and an athl eti c facil i ty. CV I has had several conversations with the Olympic Committee. The Committee is interested in this site; athletes can work there, live there, and train there. There is access to the trolley system; they can go to school, downtown, etc. There is a need for more special ized facil ities for certain sports. The athletic facilities would be open to the pUblic as well as the Olympic training athletes. Mr. Barkett stated more residential was added because they did not want more shoppi ng to compete wi th the Chul a Vi sta Center and, in thei r opi ni on, it is not a good office site. Also part of this plan is a 50,000 sq. ft. convention center. The convention center would have 2,000-2,500 seating capacity. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -9- November 17, 19BB Mr. Barkett reported he has had meeti ngs wi th the U. S. Fi sh and Wil dl ife Servi ce. Comments recei ved from thei r staff i ncl uded: more open space is desired; no problem with height; no problem with any of the location of the buildings; concern with design as far as reflection of the buildings on the marshes, possible perching, lighting on the marshes. Mr. Barkett introduced Mr. Carl Worthington of the Jerde Partnership. Using renderings of the concept plan, Mr. Worthington described the proposed project. He stated the concept plan is to create a cluster of hotel, resort, and athl eti c recreati on facil i ties that becomes a multi -dimensi onal resort. The basics of the plan are creating a shopping cluster around the inner lagoon, anchored by hotel uses, possibil ity of an amphitheater in the center for small types of venues, and three levels of residential that is on top of the retail. Additional residential in the form of low rise, village residential, in contrast to the highrise apartment buildings, allows the maximum amount of open space, creates a maximum amount of vi ew corri dors, while still creating a village/resort environment. The athletic facilities would be a combination of multi-use sport and other civic activities. Olympic scale swimming natatorium along with skating and gymnasium facilities are proposed. Around the water areas, there is a ring of small retail shops, restaurants, on the water, adjacent to the water as well as white sand beaches. Another major component of the sports complex is a 24-court tennis cl ub. The plan has taken its form from trying to be sensitive to the 100-foot buffer area along the wetl ands. The buil di ngs have been moved back another 100-150 feet so that there is a greenbelt setback on the private property as a private buffer to the wetland areas. Along the bayfront, a bikeway/walkway will become a connector between the private use of bay and the public use. Almost all of the parking would be located one to two levels underneath each building complex. Mr. Gary Cinti of Cinti & Associates, consultant to the Agency, stated a number of issues have been identified that he believes may be in conflict with pol i ci es that were di scussed earl i er and presented as criteri a. A copy of these issues was di sbursed to each Agency member. Pub 1 i c park and publ i c coastal access was identified as an issue. In the original criteria, the need for a strong publ ic corridor, publ ic access and recreational purposes was identified. The lack of publ ic uses adjacent to the bay was noted. Another issue with respect to access is the parking to the Nature Center and access to the Trolley. The future development areas are a particular problem because only half of the picture is being seen. At this point a major entry into the project is undefined. Mr. Cinti stated it needs to be brought to the attention of the Agency that there is a dominance of residential (dominance of private as opposed to publ ic spaces). The amount of open spaces, whether public or private, is an issue. The compatibility and integration with adjacent uses, i.e., the Port District property, South West Mari ne, Nature Interpreti ve Center and Wi 1 dl i fe Preserve. Off-site considerations, i.e., use of SDG&E easement, "E" Street/I-5 bridge and ramp improvements, is an issue. Redevelopment ~gency Minutes 1988 -10- November 17, The major engineering issue is traffic. There is a need to analyze the impacts as well as take into consideration the peak hour residential trips. Street configuration should be resolved early on, i.e., street geometrics and cul-de-sac capacities. Environmental/lawsuit settlement issues include the impact of high-rise buildings on wildlife; the F & G Street Marsh and desilting basin; lagoon excavation; and buffer verification. Urban Design issues include building heights and project design and character. Member Moore noted concern with residential versus office use; attracting a regional or national company for an office building. noted concern with the traffic impacts. suggested He also ~ Member r.1cCandl i ss commented the concept of the 1 agoon and the confi gurati on used is very attractive and an exciting concept. She noted concern with the lack of public access opportunities for residents of the City; she suggested orienting this plan from a public recreation standpoint. She also noted there is a lack of open space/open park area. There needs to be areas of picnic usage, etc. as part of the overall plan. Regarding the design of the towers, Ms. McCandliss pointed out the design and architecture are important and noted concern with how the towers would look from San Diego as well as the dominance of apartments/residential use in the plan. Member Nader expressed concern with the domi nance of res i denti a 1 use. He noted further concern wi th 1 and use and confi gurati on; the avail abil ity of public park opportunities, particularly close to the water. The amount of highrises is also a concern. He likes the idea of an amphitheater; however, he would like to see in the future an amphitheater near the water that can accommodate major concerts. 7. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None. 8. MEMBERS' COMMENTS None. ADJOURNMENT at 7:10 p.m. to the regular meeting of November 22, 1988 following the City Council meeting. /;' -'I /;' Á - vv; c,¿ aul G. Desrocher Community Development Director AGENDA AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, November 17, 1988 4:00 p.m. Council Conference Room ci ty Hall ROLL CALL 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 10/04/88 and 11/1/88 ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER CONSENT CALENDAR ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION IN THE FORM LISTED BELOW. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF SAID ITEMS UNLESS GOOD CAUSE IS SHOWN PRIOR TO THE TIME THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY VOTES ON THE MOTION TO ADOPT. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 2 through 4) 2. REPORT: Conceptual proposal for Marina Gateway Parcels 2, 3 and 4 3. REPORT: Downtown Parking Study 4. Report on Otay Valley Road widening Project END OF CONSENT CALENDAR PUBLIC HEARING 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Request for a special use permit by the New Harvest Christian Fellowship to locate a church at 221-225 Third Avenue RESOLUTION Adopting Negative Declaration issued under IS-88-23 and denying a request by the New Harvest Christian Fellowship to locate a church at 221-225 Third Avenue ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Page 1 of 2 "I dC~~2~e0 U~ .~:-.. _.~-'<., ,- { '~ê'r;':r'l t~;::::t I am ~ :'1:;"'0 em)OG! r " Com:~ ::":2' ti,:: ¡~. -,. . PU:':¡~C·:"'(.:"¡':;;'-'.:'¡''':' ",~\;;,( l...~j H,t¡¡On DATE:/i/J'1!IZS:::.ED vh', !ij'f-!;A~'- / " -" ,: that I p",ted .: at the " PULLED ITEMS 6. PRESENTATION: Midbayfront Planning Concept 7. DIRECTOR'S REPORT a. Status Report: Chula vista Shopping Center 8. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 9. MEMBERS' COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT to the regular meeting of December 1, 1988 at 7:00 p.m. Page 2 of 2