HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1978/10/05
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Thursday - 7:05 p.m. October 5, 1978
A regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, California
was held on the above date beginning at 7:05 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City
Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California with the following:
MEMBERS PRESENT Vi ce Chai nnan Cox, Members Scott, Egdahl
Members Excused Chairman Hyde, Member Gillow
STAFF PRESENT Executive Director Cole, Special Counsel Reed, Community
Development Director Desrochers, Community Development
Coordinator Boyd, Administrative Analyst Sanseverino
Assistant Pl anner Wel ch
ALSO PRESENT Bruce Warren (Executive Director - Coast Regional
Commission); Alan Friedman (State Coastal Commission);
Mike Kennedy (Regional Coastal Commission); Andrew C.
Hall (Jones, Hall, Hill & White); Terry McCarty (Stone &
Youngberg)
In the absence of Chainnan Hyde, Vice Chainnan Cox presided over the meeting.
ITEM NO. 1 - APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was moved by Member Scott, seconded by Member Egdahl and unanimously carried by
those present to approve the minutes of September 7 and 26, 1978 as mailed.
ITEM NO. 2 - PUBLIC HEARING: CHULA VISTA LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
Recently, approximately 200 copies of the draft LCP were printed and distributed in
accordance with the California Coastal Act of 1976. Having been declared a pilot
project city, Chula Vista is therefore exempt from certain non-substantive requirements
of the Act.
Community Development Coordinator Boyd explained to Agency members that the purpose
of the public hearing is to receive public input and any additional Agency comments
on the draft LCP. Staff will then evaluate public and Agency comments for inclusion
in the final LCP. At a later date, staff will come back to the Redevelopment Agency
with the final LCP requesting a resolution for submittal to the Regional Commission.
After the Regional Commission holds their public hearing, their evaluations will be
forwarded for final certification by the State Coastal Commission.
Mr. Boyd noted that approximately 200 copies of the draft LCP were distributed to
various persons and agencies. The list of those persons and agencies was submitted
into evidence to the Vice Chairman. (Exhibit "A")
It was also noted by the Coordinator that written comments on the draft LCP have been
received. Due to the lengthiness of the letters, Mr. Boyd briefly paraphrased each
one.
The following were submitted into evidence and entered as Exhibits "B" - "I".
10/5/78
-2-
Redevelopment Agency Meeting Octo be r 5, 1978
Letter - U. S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
Region 9 (R.G.S. Young, Director - Office
of Environment and Design)
Report - Environmental Control Commission/Historical Sites Board
(Peggy P. Donovan, Commissioner)
Letter - Whiteman Yacht Company
980 F Street
Chula Vista, CA
(Mrs. Marvin Whiteman, Property Owner)
Letter - Small & Knust
(Frank Bal istrieri, Property Owner/
Mrs. Marvin Whiteman, Property Owner/
Jim Cappos, Property Owner)
Letter - Air Pollution Control District
County of San Diego
(Raymond L. Weeks, Environmental
Management Specialist)
Letter - Environmental Control Commission
City of Chula Vista
(Gayle McCandliss, Chainnan)
Letter - U.S. Department of the Interior
Fi sh & Wil dl ife Servi ce
(Maeton C. Freel, CZM Coordinator)
Joint
Letter - Regional and State Coastal Commission staff
(Mi chael L. Fi scher, Executive Di rector/
Bruce Warren, Regional Executive Director)
Mr. Boyd at this time commented on a generalized marsh buffer cross-section plan
displayed for Agency members' review. He indicated that staff proposes the buffer
cross-section be included as part of the LCP.
There being no further comments by Agency or staff members, the public hearing was
decl ared open.
Robert Small Mr. Small spoke in opposition to the draft LCP although
Small & Knust he was in favor of some sort of pI an for the Bayfront
area. He remarked that hi s fi rm represented the pro-
pertyowners (designated as Exhibit "E") of the existing
development at the foot of F Street in the Bayfront
redevelopment area. Mr. Small seriously doubted that
the proposed pl an woul d meet the requi rements of the
Coastal Act of 1976. He pointed out several main items
that have been omitted, including: existing uses at the
foot of F Street, other existing developments, proposed
coastal related industries, development potential, etc.
10/5/78
-3-
Redevelopment Agency Meeting October 5, 1978
He questioned staff's proposal for marsh restoration
and enhancement and stated that the plan will eliminate
the employment of 55 persons now employed at the busineses
at the foot of F Street.
~a~~ Ms. Lynch, representing the League of Women Voters, re-
626 Date Avenue marked that this organization has always supported the
Chula Vista Sedway/Cooke plan and expressed her organization's
approval of the draft LCP.
Member Scott commented on ,the joint letter received from the State and Regional Coastal
Commissions. He expressed frustration with regard to the letter.
In response to Vice Chainnan Cox' query about the plan's passage without the approval
by other federal agencies, the Executive Director of the Coastal Regional Commission,
Bruce Warren, indicated that there may be problems at the State level. He further
stated that while the City of Chula Vista may feel that the plan is environmentally
sound, there is a substantial number of Federal agency regulations that must be fol-
lowed. He feels that we have a difficult road ahead if we are to obtain approval on
the plan as presented.
Ms. Jo Rathman Ms. Rathman, representing the Chula Vista Garden Club,
240 Chula Vista Street reiterated her organization's approval of the draft LCP.
J~s~rsoo Mr. Person, representing Sam and Mary Vener, objected to
Seltzer, Caplan, Wilkins & the activities by the City over the past several years.
McMahon, 3003 Fourth Avenue He contended that the Veners' property has been taken
San Diego, CA (to clear the record) and stated that the Veners reserve
all rights they have by reason of such conduct and activity.
There being no further testimony, for or against, the public hearing was declared closed.
It was moved by Member Egdahl, seconded by Member Scott and unanimously carried by
those present to accept the report.
Community Development Director Desrochers suggested that due to Congressman Van Deerlin's
interest in the subject, he be kept infonned as to comments by Federal agencies.
Mr. Desrochers referred to conversations with Messrs. Martinson and Chamberlain from
Portland, Oregon, about certain points.
Member Scott questioned the special counsel as to what legal action the Agency can take
that would solicit the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's approval of the plan, or inverse
condemnation, or whatever may be appropriate.
Special Counsel Reed remarked that if an LCP is not adopted by the Agency, the State
will have the responsibility of planning that redevelopment area. He indicated that
he was not absolutely certain in tenns of lawsuits but that the issue is becoming more
critical and as the City becomes more experienced, the solution will be more of a po-
litical issue than a legal one.
In response to various concerns about the LCP's direction, Community Development
Coordinator Boyd stated that actual plans for public acquisition of all marshes and
10/5/78
.. w"____. _ .. ~-. .
-4-
Redevelopment Agency Meeting October 5, 1978
buffer areas do exist. As far as the LCP and proposed land uses are concerned, there
is nothing in the LCP or in the Coastal Act that cannot be resolved with the Regional
and State Coastal Commissions except possibly the extension of Tidelands Avenue, which
is the key issue. Mr. Boyd continued that in identifying and completing the LCP, a
plan must be detennined that will provide for Tidelands Avenue extension. However,
the subsequent restoration measures that would be required may be too expensive for
the City to consider.
Member Scott commented on the importance of Tidelands Avenue as the key to the program
in accordance with discussioffiwith Gruen Gruen + Associates, economic and marketing
consultants.
The meeting was recessed at 7:50 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 7:55 p.m.
ITEM NO. 3 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE AN OWNER
PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH BAY BOULEVARD CORPORATION
Prior to Coastal Commission and Planning reviews, an owner participation agreement
must first be considered by the Redevelopment Agency for the proposed 6.5 + acres
(Street property) by the Bay Boulevard Corporation. The total cost upon completion
of the development (early summer of 1979) is expected to be $7\ million. Restaurant
sales and property taxes could generate $25,000 and $75,000 respectively.
Community Development Director Desrochers noted that reproducible copies of the plot
plan for each member were not available by meeting time tonight but that one copy of
said plan was on display at the table to his side.
General discussion ensued with regard to item 7 of the Owner Participation Agreement
concerning the developer's encroachment rights.
Member Egdahl expressed his reservations regarding pursuit of the RV park development.
Staff commented that the area in question would be heavily landscaped, thereby attracting
more expensive type motor homes.
It was moved by Member Egdahl to add a ten-year limitation to the RV park development.
Motion died for lack of a second.
It was moved by Member Egdahl to refer this item back to staff.
Motion died for lack of a second.
It was moved by Member Egdahl and seconded by Vice Chairman Cox to refer this Owner
Participation Agreement back to staff for further negotiations, specifically with
regard to RV park limitations.
The motion failed by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Member Egdahl, Cox
Noes: Member Scott
Absent: Member Hyde, Gillow
10/5/78
-5-
Redevelopment Agency Meeting October 5, 1978
ITEM NO. 4 - REPORT: ORANGE DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT COMPANY
As of this date, Orange Development & Investment Company has signed preliminary leases
for three tenants. These include Travelodge, All the King's Men, and McDonald's. The
specialty restaurant tenant has yet to be secured.
Agency members expressed concern that the drive-thru restaurant is not a permitted use
in the Bayfront Redevelopment Plan and questioned staff as to its acceptability.
Staff responded that it is difficult to evaluate the overall project without knowing
the identity of all the tenants. It was therefore recommended that the Agency neither
accept nor reject the tenant selection until all tenants are known.
Community Development Coordinator Boyd reiterated his comments on the exclusivity of
negotiations with Orange Development & Investment Company and recommended that if the
developer is not in a position to announce acceptable tenants by the November Agency
meeting, the Agency will be requested to tenninate that exclusivity.
It was moved by Member Scott, seconded by Vice Chairman Cox and unanimously carried
by those present to accept the report.
ITEM NO. 5 - RESOLUTION NO. 139 - CONSIDERATION OF OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
WITH MRS. MARVIN WHITEMAN FOR TEMPORARY USE OF
THE PROPERTY AT THE FOOT OF F STREET
Recently, RISI Industries, Inc. approached Mrs. Whiteman to request the use of the
Shangri-La as a storage and industrial assembly area on a short-tenn basis. M
inspection by the Fire and Building & Housing departments, accompanied by a RISI
representativ~was conducted thereafter. The inspection team found the proposed
temporary use to be compatible with the building upon correction of several code
deficiencies. Mrs. Whiteman and RISI Industries have agreed to proceed with those
corrections.
Offered by Vice Chairman Cox, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent
of those present, passed and adopted by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Member Cox, Scott, Egdahl
Noes: None
Absent: Member Hyde, Gillow
ITEM NO.6 - RESOLUTION NO. 140 - AMENDING THE FINANCIAL CONSULTING CONTRACT
WITH STONE & YOUNGBERG, MUNICIPAL FINANCING
CONSULTANTS, INC.
In order for the consulting finn of Stone & Youngberg to proceed with the sale of
SB99 bonds, an amendment to the existing financial consulting contract is in order.
A letter from Terence McCarty explaining the amendment, and previously reviewed by
the Agency, was again made available for review.
The Community Development Director introduced Mr. McCarty to Agency members. Mr. McCarty
explained that his firm proposed to act as an independent financial advisor to the
Agency. Due to the nature of the subject and complexities involved, the aid of an
underwriter would be sought.
10/5/78
,... r.... , 'W
-6-
Redevelopment Agency Meeting October 5, 1978
In response to Member Scott's question on the consultant's anticipation of a shortfall,
Mr. Desrochers answered that it could be up to $2\ million; this is the difference
between the amount paid for the land, including relocation and demolition cost, and
the resale price to Mr. Zogob.
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: Member Egdahl, Cox, Scott
Noes; None
Absent: Member Hyde, Gillow
UNANIMOUS CONSENT ITEM - RESOLUTION NO. 141 - APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH JONES, HALL,
HILL & WHITE FOR SPECIAL LEGAL SERVICES
Agency members concurred in placing this item on the agenda.
Member Scott questioned the requirement of a 4/5th's vote; Special Counsel Reed indi-
cated it was not necessary.
In order to implement the Schedule of Perfonnance as contained in the Disposition &
Development Agreement, municipal bond counsel for SB99 bonds as well as for the tax
increment issue will be necessary. Our financing consultants have recommended the
finn of Jones, Hall, Hill & White of San Francisco for the SB99 service due to their
experi ence in th i s field. As details are further resolved, it is expected that a co-
counsel for the tax increment bonds would be most appropriate.
Mr. Andrew C. Hall of the Jones, Hall, Hill & White finn introduced himself to the
Agency and reaffirmed staff's comments on his firm's experience with SB99 bonds. He
indicated that his staff is looking forward to working with the Agency on this matter.
Offered by Vice Chainnan Cox, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent
of those present, passed and adopted by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Member Cox, Scott, Egdahl
Noes: None
Absent: Member Hyde, Gillow
ITEM NO. 7 - REPORT: STATUS OF TOWN CENTRE II
Community Development Director Desrochers reported on the Fifth Avenue trial closure,
which began Monday, October 2, in conjunction with the shopping center expansion.
Mr. Desrochers infonned Agency members of the Sear's store manager's comments regarding
thi s item. Joe Ochoa, a Project Area Committee member, reported at that meeting this
morning, that the Sear's parking lot has been used as a drive-thru by vehicles wishing
to get through the barriers. To compound the problem, the Broadway is in the process
of resurfacing their parking lot. Although the first part of the week did seem con-
fusing, Mr. Ochoa noted that the problems appear to be "tail ing off."
The director also reported on his conversations with Jerry Lipp representing the
Chula Vista Shopping Center.
10/5/78
-7-
Redevelopment Agency Meeting October 5, 1978
Member Scott stated that he would like to have Mr. Lipp attend the November Redevelopment
Agency meeting.
It was moved by Member Scott, seconded by Vice Chairman Cox and unanimously carried
by those present to accept the report.
ITEM NO.8 - RESOLUTION NO. 142 - SETTING NOVEMBER 2, 1978, 7:00 P.M., CITY COUNCIL
CHAMBERS, 276 FOURTH AVENUE AS THE TIME AND PLACE
FOR A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PURPOSE OF MEETING THE
REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 33348.5
According to the Community Redevelopment Law of the Health & Safety Code, Section 33348.5
of that code requires the Redevelopment Agency to hold a public hearing biennially for
the purpose of reviewing the Redevelopment Plan for each project within its jurisdiction
and evaluating its progress. In order to properly notice this meeting within ten days
prior to the actual hearing, it is recommended that the hearing be held at the regu-
larly scheduled Redevelopment Agency meeting of November 2, 1978.
Offered by Member Scott, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent of
those present, passed and adopted by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Member Scott, Egdahl, Cox
Noes: None
Absent: Member Hyde, Gillow
The meeting was adjourned at 8:29 p.m. to the regularly scheduled meeting of
November 2, 1978.
P
10/5/78