Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1986/07/10 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, July 10, 1986 Council Conference Room 4:09 p.m. City Hall MEMBERS PRESENT: Chai rman Cox; Members Moore, Malcolm, McCandliss, Campbell MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Executi ve Di rector Goss, Assi stant Executi ve Di rector Asmus, Agency Attorney Harron, Community Development Di rector Desrochers, Assistant Community Development Director Gustafson, Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman, Administrative Analyst LoBue, Deputy City Manager Morris, Director of Finance Christopher ITEM NO.1: APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSUC (Moore/McCandliss) to approve the minutes of June 19, 1986. ITEM NO. 2 _ RESOLUTION 701/- RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE 12619 CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A STATEMENT OF INTENT WITH HOMART DEVELOPMENT CO. FOR THE RENOVATION OF THE CHULA VISTA SHOPPING CENTER AT BROADWAY AND "H" STREETS The Agency has been working with the Homart Development Company towards the renovati on of the Chul a Vi sta Shoppi ng Center at Broadway and "H" Streets. Homart Development Company requested an agreement with the City and Agency establ i shi ng an understandi ng and outl ini ng acti ons toward the renovati on of the Center. The Agency asked that pri or to consi derati on of such a document "outside" counsel be obtained. Corrrnun i ty Development Director Desrochers suggested that it would be appropriate at this time to declare the City Council in joint session with the Redevelopment Agency to consider these resolutions. The Redevelopment Agency recessed at 4:15 p.m. The Joint Redevelopment Agency /Ci ty Counci 1 convened at this time and Redevelopment Agency Chairman/Mayor Cox noted all members were present. Community Development Director Desrochers stated the services of Mr. Joseph Coomes of McDonough, Holland & Allen have been obtained. Mr. Coomes has met with the Homart Co. as well as Community Development staff to prepare another draft of the Statement of Intention. Di rector Desrochers introduced Mr. Coomes who di scussed the most recent draft. Chai rman/Mayor Cox asked Mr. Coomes if he felt the revisions made were in the best interest of the City. ~_.~._----- -------------.-- Redevelopment Agency Minutes -2- July 10, 1986 Mr. Coomes stated the Statement of Intention protects the City and the Agency. It al so gives Homart, as the developer, the necessary comfort in inducement to proceed with the time and costs that they have to expend. Member/Councilman Malcolm asked Mr. Coomes what he thought of the amount of return Homart is requesting in the Statement of Intention. Mr. Coomes felt it was not out of line for Homart to say that they are evaluating their participation in the project on the basis of a 13% rate of return before taxes. Member/Councilman Campbell questioned if there will be costs accruing to the Agency prior to the receipt of a pro forma and agreement. Director Desrochers responded that staff costs have not been resol ved. The out-of-pocket costs will be sUbject to reimbursement by Homart. The Agency will be asked to approve another contract for fiscal analysis in order to review the pro forma before entering into the agreement. Member/Councilwoman McCandl i ss commented no costs will go out unless the Agency approves them at a time subsequent to thi s and at the same time the Disposition and Development Agreement will be under negotiation. It is her understandi ng that the pro forma fi nanci a 1 work will be done at a 1 ater time and the full commitment from the agency will take place after the two documents are prepared. Di rector Desrochers responded that thi s is correct and that the analysi s of the pro forma wi 11 be one of the major tasks along forma with the amendment of the Redevelopment Plan. Communi ty Development Di rector Desrochers introduced Mr. Thomas Gourguechon, Deve 1 opment Di rector of Homart Development Co. I~r. Gourguechon noted the si gni ficant commi tment and investment hi s company i s mak i n g wi th regard to this project before having the final agreement. He also noted Homart's willingness to cooperate with the City. Director Desrochers requested Mr. Gourguechon to concur that the out-of-pocket costs referred to will be reimbursed by Homart Development Co. Mr. Gourguechon responded that this is true and that he felt the language in the Statement of Intention is flexible enough to cover everyone's concerns. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN/MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent. Member/Councilman Malcolm expressed his concern regarding the Agency's hiring a consultant for this matter. He believes the expense involved should be paid by the Agency and not by the developer. Member/Councilman Malcolm also commented the Statement of Intention is far superior to what it was. However, he will vote against approving the resolution for one reason, and that is the consi derati on of cl osi ng Fifth Avenue. He feel s it woul d be detrimental to the City and the shoppi ng center in the long run. Mr. Gourguechon responded Homart is not precl udi ng any of the al ternatives to the closure of Fifth Avenue. The motion to adopt the resolution passed (4-1 ; Member/Councilman Malcolm voting no). ----- -_.__._.-------~-~-_.._---~-_._".__. Redevelopment Agency Minutes -3- July 10, 1986 MSUC (Cox/Campbell) direct staff to move forward on bringing back information needed to create the tax increment for the Town Centre II Redevelopment Di strict. The Redevelopment Agency/City Council adjourned at 4:40 p.m. The Redevelopment Agency reconvened at this time. ITEM NO. 3 - RESOLUTION 702 - ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 1986-87 AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR The Redevelopment Agency budget was considered by the City Council on June 4, 1986, and June 9, 1986, as part of the budget review process. Si nce the Agency's funds are not deri ved from the City's General Fund revenues, it is necessary to approve the budget separately as a Redevelopment Agency item. In addition, the State Community Development Law requires that a budget be adopted annually for all redevelopment projects. MEMBER McCANDLlSS OFFERED THE RESOLUTION, the readi ng of the text was wai ved by unanimous consent. Member Camp be 11 ques ti oned the total figure on the resolution. He noted an approximately $5,000 differential from the Agency consideration total on Exhibit A. It was poi nted out that the $5,350 Industri al Development Authori ty fi gure was not included on the Resolution. Director Desrochers stated that when an Industrial Development Authority meeting is held, this figure will be approved at that time. Member Moore questioned if $15,000 was being included for the Town Centre I Vogue Theatre study. Chairman Cox responded the money budgeted is contingent upon the community raising $5,000. The Agency would pay $10,000. Member Moore stated he bel i eves the communi ty cannot rai se the money, therefore, he cannot support this particular item and would like to register an objection to this portion. Member Malcolm concurred. The motion to adopt the resolution passed (3-2; Member Malcolm voted no on the entire budget; Member Moore voted no on $15,000 allocation for Cultural Arts Study). DIRECTOR'S REPORT - None. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT - None. MEMBERS' CO~~ENTS MSUC (McCandliss/Cox) to have staff prepare an itinerary for the Agency to review with regard to viewing Bayfront and mari na developments, including developments in industrial areas. ADJOURNMENT at 4:57 p.m. to the mid-month uly 17, 1986 at 4:00 p.m. aul G. Desrochers, WPC 2411H ---,' '-~-""--~'-'-"--"""---------'--'-----'--"------