Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1988/12/15 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, December 15, 1988 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Council Conference Room City Hall MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Chairman Cox; Members Nader, Malcolm and Moore Member McCandliss Executive Director Assi stant Principal Director Goss, Community Development Desrochers, Agency Attorney Harron, Community Development Director Gustafson, Community Development Specialist Putnam 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 11/17/88 and 11/22/88 MSUC (Cox/Moore) approve the mi nutes of 11 /17/88 and 11 /22/88 as submi tted. (The vote was 3-0; Member Malcolm abstained. ) 2. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS a. Letter of resignation from the Town Centre Project Area Committee from Dana Toogood MSUC (Malcolm/Cox) to accept the resignation and send a letter of appreciation to Dana Toogood for her service on the committee. MS (Moore/Malcolm) direct staff to review with the Agency and the Project Area Commi ttee what the number of members on each committee shoul d be; reduce or . expand. Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman reported that several years ago the Town Centre Project Area Committee and the Parking Commission were merged. Through attri ti on, it is the goal to have the committee consi st of seven members. With the resignation of Ms. Toogood the committee is down to nine members. The moti on was withdrawn. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 3 through 10) Consent Calendar items 4, 7, 8, and g were pulled. MSUC (Nader/Cox) approve Consent Calendar items 3, 5, 6 and 10. Agency Mi nutes 3. RESOLUTION 971 -2- December J5, J988 ACCEPTING THE WATERBIRD AND LEAST TERN FORAGING STUDY, TERMINATING THE AGREEMENT WITH JONES AND STOKES ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR PREPARATION OF THE BAYFRONT EIR/EIS, AND AUTHORIZING REFUND OF UNSPENT PORT DISTRICT CONTRIBUTION On May 19, 1987, the Agency directed staff to suspend preparation of the EIR/EIS for Bayfront projects requiring federal approval s. In an effort to keep the envi ronmenta 1 revi ew process movi ng forward pendi ng resol uti on of several specifi c issues with the U. S. Army Corps of Engi neers, the Agency authorized completion of a year-long waterbird and least tern foraging study. It was recommended that the Agency (1) accept the least tern and waterbird study; (2) termi nate the agreement wi th Jones & Stokes Assoc., Inc. for preparation of the Bayfront EIR/EIS; and (3) authorize refunding the unspent Port District contribution for the EIR/EIS. 5. RESOLUTION 972 RATIFYING PARKING LOT SUBLEASE BETWEEN SAFEWAY STORES, INC. AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, APPROVING AMENDMENT TO SUBLEASE, AND AUTHORIZING CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE SAME On December 4, 1986, the Redevelopment Agency accepted deeds for properties located at 427-431 Third Avenue and several parcels on adjacent Alvarado Street for the purpose of consolidating parcels downtown for the possible development of new district offices of the Sweetwater Union High School District. Included with this action was approval of the Assumption of Lease for Parcel No. 568-420-15 (parking lot portion of 435 Third Avenue). However, since information required for a title search on that parcel could not be obtained, the Assumption of Lease was not executed and the Agency entered into a sublease of the property from Safeway Stores. An amendment to that sublease was requested by Safeway. 6. RESOLUTION 973 APPROVING THE APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR THE FIG AVENUE CUL-DE-SAC CONSTRUCTION PROJECT On October 20, 1988 the Redevelopment Agency approved a cost shari ng pI an for the constructi on of a cul-de-sac and street wi deni ng of Fi g Avenue north of Shasta Street. The developer of the Town Centre II Redevelopment Project, Homart Development Company, was required by the agreement to contribute $30,674 for the construction costs. Homart remitted the required payment and it must be appropriated for the Agency to be able to use it for the project. 10. RESOLUTION 974 APPROVING NINYO & MOORE AS THE CONSULTANT TO PROVIDE SERVICES RELATED TO TOXIC SUBSTANCE EVALUATION FOR A TWO-YEAR PERIOD AND AUTHORIZING THE AGREEMENT On October 20, 1988, authori zati on was gi ven by the Redevelopment Agency to issue a Request for Proposal s (RFP) for the provision of services related to toxic substance evaluation for a two-year period. Five proposals were submitted in response to the RFP. The top ranking firm was Ninyo & Moore. Agency Mi nutes -3- December 15, 1988 END OF CONSENT CAlENDAP 13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None. PULLED ITEMS 8. RESOLUTION 975 APPROVING FIRST AMENDMENT TO EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT WITH CHULA VISTA AUTO CENTER, INC. FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A PROPOSED AUTO MALL On September 1, 1988, the Redevelopment Agency approved an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Chula Vista Auto Center, Inc. for a proposed Auto Mall at Interstate 805 and Otay Valley Road. The term of the agreement was for six months, expiring February 28, 1988. Since the inception of the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement, it has become apparent that substantially longer than six months will be needed to execute a Disposition and Development Agreement, particularly in the area of environmental processing. An amendment extending the term of the agreement was prepared. That agreement also addresses the responsibility for the cost of the necessary Environmental Impact Report. Member Nader noted that the Auto Park Task Force met on this date and he would like to have their input from the meeting. Assistant Community Development Director Gustafson stated the meeting was an update meeting; the report from the economic consultant was discussed; the Task Force did not take any particular action. There was some discussion of the need for a firm timeline so that all the dates are in hand as to when each activity will occur during the period of exclusive negotiation. Staff will be working on that immediately. Member Nader stated he believes the Project Area Committee and Auto Park Task Force should have input as to whether the Agency should approve this item. Also, he is not comfortable with an agreement that says the Agency may have to reimburse the developer for hal f of the cost of the Environmental Impact Report, even though the Agency has not made a decision as to whether or not it is somethi ng they want to move forward with. He bel i eves the Agency shoul d have the input of the Task Force and Project Area Committee and make the underlying decision that this is economically desirable and the land use the Agency wants to move forward with, and then enter into this agreement. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved. (The vote was 3-1; Member Nader voting no.) 4. RESOLUTION 976 ENTERING INTO AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREE~1ENT ,11TH DANIEL MALCOLM AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW OFFICE BUILDING AT 466 THIRD AVENUE IN CHULA VISTA Daniel Malcolm and Associates proposed constructing a 2,443 square foot, two-story office building with eleven parking stalls at 466 Third Avenue Agency Mi nutes -4- December 15, 1988 within the Town Centre Redevelopment Project Area. It was recommended that the Agency adopt the resolution entering into an Owner Participation Agreement with Daniel Malcolm and Associates for construction of the proposed office building subject to conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Owner Participation Agreement. Chairman Cox noted the agenda statement refers to two mature trees located on the property that will have to be removed in order to allow construction. Has consideration been given to find out if the trees could be acquired by the City to use at a City park (perhaps Memorial Park)? Ms. Casey Racer, representing the appl icant, stated they have not been approached up to this point regarding the trees. It is her understanding that there are no plans to use the trees and she would be amenable to discussing this with City staff. Chairman Cox further referred to the Disclosure Statement. He noted that Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator, is listed as having had more than $250 worth of business transacted with the appl icant. Does this present confl ict with regard to the environmental review of this project? Agency Attorney Harron responded that Doug Reid could not participate in this decision. It was noted that Mr. Reid's assistant conducted the review. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN COX, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. (The vote was 3-0; Member Malcolm abstained.) 7. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE AGREEMENT WITH GIRARD FINANCIAL FOR POSTING FUNDS IN LIEU OF RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION FOR OTAY VALLEY ROAD On November 17, 1988, the Redevelopment Agency adopted an al i gnment for Otay Valley Road between the Animal Shelter and Nirvana subject to further environmental reVlew. That alignment requires shifting the existing centerl ine of Otay Vall ey Road to the south, whi ch accommodates the approved Girard Financial site plan on the triangular-shaped property north of the roadway. Girard Financial would like to post funds for the acquisition of the 29,328 square feet of additional right-of-way south of Otay Valley Road that is required to satisfy the dedication requirement included in their Tentative Parcel Map approval. Member Nader noted concern that the cost of acquisition may exceed $100,000, however, Girard's liability would be limited to $100,000. He would be more comfortable in deleting No.3 from the list of key provisions that is on page 3 of the staff report: "3) Girard will not be required to pay additional money shoul d the cost of obtai ni ng fee titl e to the property exceed the funds depos i ted pI us the interest earned on those funds." Member Malcolm suggested an Indemnity Agreement be drawn up for any additional money required. It is his opinion that if there is excess cost involved, it should not be passed on to the Assessment District; it is not their responsibility. It is this property owner's responsibility. Agency Minutes -5- December 15, 1988 Mr. Desrochers noted that the Agency has an Owner Participation Agreement which states that Girard will participate in the Assessment District. Girard wi 11 have to pay the excess costs, if any. The other property owners \'/i 11 only be charged what benefits their property. Ms. Putnam poi nted out thi s item was on the Council December 13, 1988, and it passed on consent. Therefore, present at this meeting. If changes are proposed, she this item to allow the applicant to be present. agenda on Tuesday, the applicant is not suggested continuing RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN COX, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent. Member Malcolm asked if more than $100,000 is required to obtain fee title to the ri ght-of-way, wi 11 Gi rard be requi red to pay the excess upon the formi ng of the Assessment District? Ms. Putnam stated that if the cost exceeds $100,000, the Assessment Engineer will look at what all property owners have contributed to the road widening project, and ~lÌll look at the $100,000 that Girard put up for the purchase of the right-of-way south of the road for their share of the dedication. It will then be determined how the additional cost should be distributed throughout the Assessment District. Executive Director Goss commented the Assessment Engineer makes a recommendati on to the Agency. Therefore, the Agency makes the fi na 1 deci si on as to how any excess cost would be distributed among the property owners. The resolution was not approved. opposed. ) MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) to continue approve this agreement subject to if Girard so chooses. (The vote was 2-2; Members Malcolm and Nader this item to Tuesday, December 20, 1988; staff entering into an Indemnity Agreement 9. RESOLUTION 977 APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE LOWER SWEETWATER VALLEY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONINGS, REZONINGS AND EVENTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY The Planning Commission at their meeting of September 28, 1988, determined that an Envi ronmenta I Impact Report (EIR) shoul d be prepared to evaluate the proposals for various General Plan amendments, zoning, rezoning changes, and de vel opment proposal s for the area south of the Sweetwater Flood Control Channel and to the east of North Second Avenue. The discretionary actions involve a combination of public and private initiatives. After discussions with several environmental consulting firms, it was determined that the cost of preparing the environmental document would be in the $25-30,000 range. The City's share of this cost would be about $21,600 (not including contingencies) with a private developer responsible for the remaining balance of approximately $8,400. Agency Mi nutes -6- December 15, 1988 At the City Council meeting of December 6, 1988, it was determined that funding would be more appropriate from the Agency's Low-Moderate Income Housing Fund. It was recommended that the Agency appropriate $21,600 for the preparation of environmental documents for the lower Sweetwater Valley GPA/zoning or if a complete environmental alternative analysis were undertaken, $36,600. Member Nader commented he woul d I ike to see the City/Agency have some way of assessing property owners their fair share of the costs involved in these studies. He suggested a Developer Impact Fee or another mechanism. ~Ir. Harron poi nted out an Assessment Di stri ct can generally show the phys i cal improvement benefits, however, EIR studies would be much more speculative. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOL~1, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. 12. REPORT: COMMUNITY HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM POLICIES REGARDING DEFERRED PAYMENT LOANS The City Council has asked for a City Council Conference on the Community Housing Improvement Program (CHIP) policies, particularly relating to payback and equity sharing on deferred loans for housing rehabil itation. This report was in response to that request. It is felt that the subject is specific enough and the information is succinct enough that it might be appropriately handled as a report on the Redevelopment Agency agenda, rather than incur the additional delay of scheduling a City Council conference. Member Malcolm commented that if the program for 62 years of age and older is not bei ng used, perhaps the Agency shoul d cons i der offeri ng the program to first time homebuyers. He would like to see the program expanded to help more people and still develop a means of recouping some of the money. MS(Nader/Malcolm) accept staff recommendation and refer to staff the comments made by Member Malcolm for possible inclusion of younger people and first time homebuyers in the program. Housing Rehabil itation Administrator Ciotti stated there is a program for peopl e under the age of 62. It is a two-year deferred loan program. The reason it is two-year deferred is that because at the end of two years income levels may have changed drastically. At the time their income increases, they are placed on a paying status. Mr. Gustafson stated it is a two-year review period. He added that if their income exceeds what would make them eligible for the deferred loan, they are put into an amortized loan status which would not cause them to pay more than their ability to pay on that loan. The loan is not "called". SUBSTITUTE MOTION MS (Cox/Moore) approve the staff report. The moti on fa il ed. (The vote was 2-1; Member Nader voted no; Member Malcolm was not present for the vote.) Agency Minutes MOTION -7- December 15, 1988 Member Nader moved to accept staff recommendation and refer to staff the (a) eligibility for the program, and (b) the terms of the two-year deferred loans; whether there should be an automatic extension at the end of two years for people who fit certain criteria after so many years. The motion failed for lack of a second. Cha i rman Cox suggested docketi ng thi s item for Tuesday, December 20, 1988. Member Malcolm left the meeting at 5:00 p.m. The Redevelopment Agency recessed at 5:00 p.m. The meetin9 reconvened at 5:05 p.m. 11. REPORT: BAYFRONT LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT - CHULA VISTA INVESTORS The negotiating agreement between the Agency and Chula Vista Investors (Will i am Barkett) reached its 90th day on December 1. The 90th day is a benchmark regarding the progress of negotiations with Rohr Corporation and the physical planning efforts that will lead to a Local Coastal Plan amendment. Mr. William Barkett of Chula Vista Investors reported on the status of their negotiations with Rohr Corporation. He stated that they have tentatively reached an agreement with Rohr whereby they will buy the land. CVI will build their building for them. CVI will rent the building to Rohr. Mr. Barkett further reported the term of the bridge loan was for 120 days. Upon the 90th day if a sale had not been consummated then the borrower was to provi de a Letter of Credit to the Agency in the amount of the loan pI us interest. The Letter of Credit has been received by the Agency. Mr. Desrochers added that if an escrow is not opened and actually closed by the end of December, then the Agency has the prerogati ve to draw down the Letter of Credi t. He stated the Agency woul d be consul ted before any such action would occur. Regarding the Local Coastal Program, Mr. Desrochers stated the end of December is on the time schedul e for the Agency to gi ve the developer the go ahead to start preparing a Local Coastal Program amendment. He commented it is important that the Agency does not give Mr. Barkett and CVI any fal se hopes that the Agency would be approving any specifics (certain number of units; hei ght 1 imi ts, etc.). Through the process of LCP amendment and all the reviews that are essential to that process, that is when the Agency can make such determinations. At this time, any approvals are conceptual in nature. Mr. Barkett stated they have been consulting with a traffic engineer in developing this plan. There is less traffic in the current plan for the enti re Mi dbayfront than contai ned in the approved pI an. They real i ze the two main concerns in the project besides design are traffic and environmental. They have met with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service again, as well as the Coastal Commission and Sierra Club. - Agency t~i nutes -8- December J5, J988 Mr. Carl Worthington of the Jerde Partnership addressed the Agency on behalf of CVI. Using renderings, Mr. Worthington described the proposed project. He pointed out the Agency is looking at a "concept diagram"; the buildings are very symbolic of building types, but they are not building layouts. They are trying to establish a set of concept perimeters to provide guidelines as they move into the next phase of more detailed planning. The plan has been revised through a seri es of three or four evol uti ons si nce it was 1 ast presented to the Agency. The concept of a worl d cl ass resort communi ty remai ns the same. The essence of the concept is to bri ng together those uses that mutually support each other to create a total activity village center. A number of modi fi cati ons have been made to the pl an to try to enhance the open space element which is seen from the City's point of view, aside from traffic, to be one of the most important elements as an amenity to the ci ti zens of Chul a Vi sta. The bui 1 di ngs have been pull ed back s i gni fi cantly from the water edge; a residential complex has now been designated a resort hotel - midrise with bungalow type of units; there are now 3 apartment towers (instead of 4) which have been moved back a minimum of 250 feet. Additional modifications have been made to the interchange area. The possibility of having a secondary access into the development was discussed, as well as the concept of developing a frontage street. The water feature has been moved further to the south in order to allow a larger amount of park/buffer area against the wetlands. He pointed out there is basically 100% r- of waterfront frontage available to the public. He noted it is important that the character of Marina Parkway as much as possible, within the limits of safety and City standards, take on a village resort character. It is desired that it not become an intercommunity arterial traffi c carri er in itself. It is important for the roadway system to be a part of the village character. Mr. Worthi ngton commented it is important in the concept of the plan that it is a combination of cluster/density in order to secure vast areas of open space. The clusters of density will allow much larger areas to be left in natural or active kinds of open space. Mr. Worthington al so noted it is important to have a major gateway statement at the entryways. Mr. Barkett introduced t·1r. John Craddock of the Radi sson Corporati on. Mr. Craddock stated that at the year-end board meeting for the Radisson Corporation, they formally approved the company's participation in this project. He reported that Radisson is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Carl son Compani es. The Carl son Compani es are a privately-hel d company that will do approximately $5.5 billion worth of business this year. They are the largest travel conglomerate in the Western Hemisphere. Last year Radisson was given the Five Medallion Award by the American Association of Travel Editors as the outstanding hotel company in the United States in terms of growth and facilities, cuisine, development and service. Agency Mi nutes -9- December 15, 1988 Radisson is a corporate-based hotel company that seeks to do business at the middle to upper-middle level of the market. Typical hotel rooms run $75 a night at the inn level (which is their lowest level of property) to $120 _ $125 a night for the most expensive room at the plaza level. Corporate rates run in the hi gh $60 to low $70 range. Mr. Craddock further stated Radi sson will be adding 3800 new hotel rooms in California this year with approximately 4,000 next year. The reason Radisson feel s a 26 story hotel is desirable rather than a shorter design is that by going higher, they could go narrower. By going narrower, they could provide a more intimate feeling in the buildings. Customers will not have long distances to walk. There would be a greater safety factor for women customers, which now represent 40% of their business. Also, as a small building it will not cast a lot of shadows. By going higher, the rooms will have a good vi ew. It wi 11 be compact whi ch wi 11 make it easy to servi ce, which makes it become a cost-effective design. They felt it woul d be more environmentally sensitive. Mr. Craddock further stated Radisson supports the residential community for several reasons. It would be a safety factor; it provides a built-in business for the restaurants in the hotel; it might reduce the traffic. Mr. Gary Cinti of Cinti and Associates, consultants to the Agency, commented on the project. At this point, the Agency/City is dealing with a concept diagram and is trying to establish the basic concepts. One issue that may be a potential problem is the alignment of Marina Parkway at the extension of E Street. The traffic analysis indicates that it will be a 4-lane facility. The Engineering staff has indicated that when there is a 4-lane facility, even though it is desired that traffic travel at 15 - 25 MPH, people who are on a road facility of that type assume a certain standard exists. The City Engi neer has stated that on any four-l ane faci 1 i ty there woul d be a 40 MPH design standard. It may be posted for 25 MPH, but the design standard would be established based on engineering/traffic criteria. Mr. Cinti further stated the traffic analysis has assumptions that need to be discussed and reviewed by the City/Agency to see whether or not they agree with the assumptions made in the analysis. A lot of the plan is based on assumptions that the City/Agency mayor may not agree with ultimately in terms of level of i ntens i ty, etc. The Redevelopment Agency recessed at 6:20 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 6:30 p.m. Mr. Cinti pointed out the existing Local Coastal Program has over 26 acres of park. It is not likely that the Coastal Commission would amend a Local Coastal Program that reduces public park. One issue is whether the amount of parkland that existed before is a minimum, and it has been staff's position that it is at the minimum. Another issue is where should the parkland be and what kind of benefit goes to the City's residents. Agency Minutes -10- December 15, 1988 Mr. Cinti further commented on the proposed serpentine road. It may not be possible to incorporate as many of the reversing curbs and design that is being proposed. If the design of this roadway starts to flatten out and take on different shapes, some of the things that work in this proposed plan may not work. Whether the City wants to give some guidance on roadways is one of the issues. The roadway wi 11 be servi ng other purposes other than just the resort area. If a street is intended to be a slower moving street, it may have impact on the amount of traffic it can carry which would rollover into the project as a whole. There are some geometric design changes that would be necessary to the road from basic safety standpoints. Mr. Barkett commented that at this point they do not have anything definite set up with the Olympics. CVI wants to put a sports facility in; whether or not it is util ized by the Olympics does not determine whether or not it will be part of the project. Member Nader stated he believes there is still a need for the sub-committee to meet. He believes land use allocation needs to be looked at further. The doubling of the residential units is the one issue he has serious qualms about. Member Nader further commented he woul d hope it is staff's i ntenti on to develop some independent analysis of economic questions. Ms. Putnam stated the Agency has an economic consultant on board who will be reviewing this aspect. Member Moore stated the publ ic benefits of the proposed project shoul d be detailed in order to increase building heights. This will have to be presented to the Council and Coastal Commission. Mr. Barkett stated they would like to start their studies. Basically, they would like the Agency to say they like the concept, start the studies regarding traffic and environmental, etc., and start preparing the LCP amendment. Mr. Craddock stated Radisson has a corporate pol icy that they some i ndi cati on of the Agency I s concept approval subject conditions so that they can proceed with their work. Agency Attorney Harron stated if any approval action were taken it might compromise a publ ic hearing that is required at a later date. The Agency is to hold off making decisions on the project until after they have had the input of the public. Therefore, to approve the project now would be i nappropri ate. The problem wi th a conceptual approval is what does it mean, what has been approved? What is left to be negotiated? If it means part of the project has been approved in some respect, then it has been done in a premature manner because there has not been a public hearing first. need to have to whatever Agency Mi nutes -11- December 15, 1988 Mr. Goss suggested the appropriate acti on woul d be to refer to staff and consultant to work wi th the developer to address the p 1 anni ng, design, and economic issues that have been raised. Ms. Putnam stated it is important that staff get direction from the .A.gency regarding the public park issue. Staff will need to start contacting Coastal Commission staff to discuss the policy direction. Mr. Worthington pointed out the proposed plan has approximately 20 acres of active and passive park; water area is approximately 11.4 acres. Ms. Putnam questioned the amount of credit that should be given for the acres of the water feature. Should it be 1:1 or less? Mr. Goss stated he believes this is a matter that staff should discuss with the Coastal Commission. Mr. Nader further commented it would be helpful to staff to have some general idea from the Agency of the direction that would be appropriate with regard to credit for the water feature. Mr. Moore stated he does not want staff to go to the Coastal Commission with a specific ratio of credit for the water feature; it is too limiting. Chairman Cox commented he does not find anything unacceptable as far as the amount of parkland and open space proposed. Member Moore stated he does not have any problem with the concept. MS (Cox/Moore) refer this plan to staff to evaluate; give direction to staff to sit down with the proposer and resolve the issues that have been raised and move forward with the LCP amendment. Member r·100re stated he does not want traffic engineers to dictate the design of the resort. He does not want the people who are designing the resort to dictate what the streets will do. It needs to be mutual. He would like a high class development that is successful. Member Nader commented he believes staff is moving in a good direction with regard to the park issue. He believes some credit for the lagoon is appropriate. Some consideration needs to be given to the sports complex; the extent that it will be open to the public. He is looking for a combination of open space and recreational opportunities. The motion passed unanimously. Member Nader further noted he would like traffic and school impacts as well as the visual and aesthetic impacts addressed. 14. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: a. Status Report: Chula Vista Shopping Center Mr. Goss reported that the landscaping is completed. Also, the Homart parking plans show the provision of 33 handicapped parking spaces throughout the center; however, only 13 were striped. As a result, the parking lot is not being accepted by the Building and Housing Department and staff continues to talk with Homart on this issue. ,-' Agency Mi nutes -12- December J5, 1988 Mr. Goss further reported that Vons will close by the end of the month despite efforts by Homart to retain the market. Homart is negotiating with Osco to relocate to the new center. 15. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: Chairman Cox asked about the status of the street improvements with regard to Orange Tree Mobilehome Park. Mr. Gustafson reported that the Homeowners Association has been getting specs from an engineering company so that they can go out to bid. 16. MEMBERS' COMMENTS: Member Nader commented that he had made an appeal at Tuesday ni ght' s Council meeting with regard to Vanessa Grant who has Leukemia and was in need of money. Ms. Grant called Mr. Nader to inform him that she had been accepted by the City of Hope on a priority basis which means that her operation will be funded through the City of Hope. ADJOURNMENT at 7:35 p.m. to the regular meeting of December 20, 1988 following the City Council meeting scheduled to begin at 7:00 p.m. ~~£ Community Development Director WPC 3912H AGENDA REVISED 12/14/88 AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, December 15, 1988 4:00 p.m. Council Conference Room City Hall ROLL CALL 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 11/17/88 and 11/22/88 2. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS a. Letter of resignation from the Town Centre Project Area Committee from Dana Toogood 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 3 through 10) 3. RESOLUTION Accepting the Waterbird and Least Tern Foraging Study, Terminating the Agreement with Jones and Stokes Associates, Inc. for Preparation of the Bayfront EIR/EIS, and Authorizing Refund of Unspent Port District Contribution 4. RESOLUTION Entering into an Owner Participation Agreement with Daniel Malcolm and Associates for the construction of a new office building at 466 Third Avenue in Chula Vista 5. RESOLUTION Ratifying Parking Lot Sublease Between Safeway Stores, Inc. and the Redevelopment Agency, Approving Amendment to Sublease, and Authorizing Chairman to execute same 6. RESOLUTION Approving the appropriation of funds for the Fig Avenue cul-de-sac construction project (4/5ths Vote Required) 7. RESOLUTION Authorizing the agreement with Girard Financial for posting funds in lieu of right-of-way dedication for Otay Valley Road Page 1 of 2 .~_._.- -" ------.. ._. 8. RESOLUTION Approving First Amendment to Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Chula Vista Auto Center, Inc. for Development of a Proposed Auto Mall 9. RESOLUTION Appropriating funds for the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the lower Sweetwater Valley General Plan amendment, zonings, rezonings and eventual development of the property (4j5ths Vote Required) 10. RESOLUTION Approving Ninyo & Moore as the consultant to provide services related to toxic substance evaluation for a two-year period and authorizing the agreement END OF CONSENT CALENDAR 11. REPORT: Bayfront Local Coastal Program Amendment _ Chula Vista Investors 12. REPORT: Community Housing Improvement Program Policies Regarding Deferred Payment Loans 13. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS PULLED ITEMS 14. DIRECTOR'S REPORT a. Status Report: Chula Vista Shopping Center 15. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT 16. MEMBERS' COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT to the regular meeting of January 19, 1988 at 4:00 p.m. Page 2 of 2 ..t d.o""~"~ t'n""'r ~''''l-'P-'! of ¡:·eriwj,' that am em--7;'~~ ',' '::"! "~';c '¿i'~", ~; C_'<,:~ 'V~:>a :n e:ü , -"'r,~_'~' ,...~. .-- " '-"'n~ 2!1) t~êt j paste(' C;C;~" ~ '"' - , . ,.~ ~ t ;;e th' :'j -', ,':':}: ¡:::: Cil 'lC Pu~;.ç "_~ "¡(:~;J'~:': ".:Ln:.; D['T=,8j.tJj..1 r SIGNED ::n.~ _" ',./.:.j h:::; c¡..! J lJ (lk<~ ..