Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1986/11/06 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA November 6, 1986 Council Chambers 7:00 p.m. Public Services Building ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chai rman Cox; Members Campbell, Moore, McCandliss and Malcolm MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Executi ve Director Goss, Community Development Director Desrochers, Assistant Community Development Director Gustafson, Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman, Community Development Specialist Davies, Agency Attorney Harron ITEM NO.1: APPROVAL OF MINUTES DF OCTOBER 2 AND OCTOBER 7, 1986 MSUC (McCandl i ss/Campbell) to approve the mi nutes of October 2 and October 7, 1986. (4-0; Member Malcolm not present for vote.) ITEM NO.2: RESOLUTION 743 DETERMINING THE PUBLIC NECESSITY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY LOCATED AT 496 THIRD AVENUE TO CONSOLIDATE PROPERTIES FOR MAJOR REDEVELOPMENT AND AUTHORIZING COMMENCEMENT PROCEEDINGS, AND ADOPTI NG NEGATIVE DECLARATION ISSUED UNDER IS-87-8 FOR THIS PROJECT The Redevelopment Agency directed staff to acquire the property located at 496 Thi rd A venue (known as the Cotija Taco Shop) in order to correct certain hazardous traffic conditions that affect public heal th and safety in this area. Staff received an apprai sal for the subject property and negoti ated with the owners and their representative in order to reach a mutually acceptable purchase price. Thus far, the owners have rejected the offer and counter offers proposed by the Agency. The Agency is asked to adopt the requisite resolution authorizing eminent domain proceedings to take place. Community Development Di rector Desrochers stated thi s item was schedul ed several weeks ago and in deference to the owner of the property was continued to thi s meeting. Mr. Desrochers further stated that legal counse 1 representing the owner of the property is present. Chairman Cox asked if there was anyone present from the public who would like to speak on thi s item. Louis E. Goebel, 1202 Kettner Boulevard, San Diego, Attorney, spoke on behalf of the owner, the Grossman Trust. He stated there has not been a demon strati on for publ i c need of thi s property. The property owners rely heavily on the income from these properties and it will be very Redevelopment Agency -2- November 6, 1986 difficult for them to achieve an equivalent financial position. The owners strongly oppose this action. Mr. Goebel further stated the Town Centre Plan requires in Article 4, paragraph 460.6, that the Agency may not acquire real property upon which an existing building is located unless the Agency proposes to rehabil itate, redevelop or reorganize the real property in question. Mr. Goebel stated a specific project has not been described that would meet the requirement as stated in the Town Centre Plan. Member McCandliss stated the Environmental Impact Report is correct in that it only addresses the acqui si ti on. I f at a 1 ater time the Agency develops a specific plan of use then another environmental document will need to be prepared. In the Negative Declaration it states that on the long term basis the Agency intends to investigate consolidation of the properties and develop at that point. The project is a consolidation. The Agency is acquiring this property because of the safety concern and al so in working on the long term project of consolidating properties. r~r. Desrochers stated it has always been the aim of the Agency to attempt to consolidate this property with the adjacent property owners. Agency Attorney Harron stated that Member McCandl i ss described the proj ect very accurately. The intent is to rehabil itate and reorgani ze by consolidation. The project is to clean up that corner, perhaps consolidate and clean up the traffic situation which the Agency perceives as a problem. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN COX, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent. Member McCandliss stated regarding the comment of Attorney Goebel of the loss of income to the owners. She bel ieves no one on the Agency takes 1 ightly the power of eminent domain. The Agency has a traffic problem and redevelopment responsibilities to deal with. Through the eminent domain proceedings a fair market value for the property with other associated costs will be established. The resolution passed and was adopted unanimously. ITEM NO.3: RESOLUTION 744 APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE ACQU ISITION OF 496 THIRD AVENUE RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN COX, the readi ng of the text was wai ved by unanimous consent, passed and adopted unanimously. Redevelopment Agency -3- November 6, 1986 ITEM NO.4: REPORT: AGENCY PROPERTY ACQU ISITION AND DISPOSITION REGARDING SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT OFFICES AND JOINT CORPORATION YARD RESOLUTION 745 APPROVING STATEMENT OF INTENTION WITH SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT CONCERNING REAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION AND DISPOSITION AND DIRECTING EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO PROCEED WITH ASSOCIATED ESCROWS The Agency has di rected the Executi ve Di rector to pursue the acqui si ti on of certain parcel s in the Town Centre I Redevelopment Project Area for the purpose of conveying the consolidated parcels to the Sweetwater Union High School District in exchange for the District's contribution to the City of land for a joint District-City corporation yard. Assi stant Communi ty Development Di rector Gustafson stated that the agreement before the Agency is a Statement of Intention between the Agency and the School Di stri ct. He pointed out that it is a non-binding agreement intended to give comfort to the Agency and District pursuing certain property acquisitions and transactions and al so in facil ity planning as a j oi nt effort. Mr. Gustafson further noted the i ntenti ons stated are that the Ci ty would buy the property i dentifi ed in the exhibit attached to the Agenda Statement and consolidate those properties making them available to the School District. The School District would proceed to build a new district office facility on the property. In exchange for the value of that property, the City would be provided with a location for a corporation yard that could be bui 1 t jointly with the School District, and there may be opportuniti es to share facilities and services. Mr. Gustafson pointed out issues remain regarding timing and compensating values that will need to be worked out with formal agreements to follow. The Statement of Intention has been approved by the School District and signed by the superintendent. On the escrow for parcel s 1, 2, 3 and 4 there is a non-specific easement to the water company which is being removed. However, it will not be removed before the close of escrow. The Agency woul d have to accept ti tl e to the property with that easement sti II remaining for a short time. Additionally, the same easement exists on the Star News property and is bei ng removed as well. Mr. Gustafson stated he wou I d I' ke to change the recommendati on by pl aci ng a conditi on on proceedi ng wi th the escrow on the Star News buil di ng. The condition would be based upon receipt of 1 ease documents. Chairman Cox asked if the terms of the leases are known. Mr. Gustafson stated the Agency would take title subject to one lease which is for 2 years with a 2 year additional option. Chairman Cox asked how many other leases there are. Mr. Gustafson responded there is one other formal lease and two verbal agreements that need to be further illustrated before it is understood what the commitment is. "_~._... "_'___'_ _._. .__, .·.·m..···..·.__._·~,__ Redevelopment Agency -4- November 6, 1986 Member Malcolm asked Executive Di rector Goss if he is sati sfi ed wi th the negotiations between the Agency and the School District. Mr. Goss stated that yes he is sati sfi ed. Within the time avail abl e, reasonable progress was made. Member Malcolm further asked Mr. Goss if he felt the School District is not wavering, that the Board is going to proceed. Mr. Goss responded they are on board, as evidenced by their signing of the Statement of Intention. Member C ampbe II asked about the $35,000 deposit and why it was made non-refundable. Mr. Goss stated thi s transacti on was actually entered into with no money and a 7 to 8 week free look at the property. At this point, the Agency wi II proceed through the entire deal and acqui re the properti es for approximately $2 million. Member McCandliss questioned the value differential mentioned which would be compensated between the Di stri ct and the City. She wanted to be sure that staff is working closely with the District so that when the land is ready for the corporati on yard that it is in an area that is acceptabl e to the Agency. Mr. Gustafson stated the Statement of Intention stipulates that the site woul d have to be acceptabl e to the City. Staff will be working very closely with School District staff to make sure this site is acceptable for a City yard. Chairman Cox questioned if the City is responsi bl e for provi di ng cleared land. Mr. Gustafson stated that the Statement of Intention is not so wri tten. An agreement has not been made at this poi nt with the School District to del iver them a cleared site. When the School District was initially looking at this proposal they were anticipating the possible renovation of the existing structures while at this point they are looking at new construction. Chai rman Cox further questi oned if the two houses in questi on are currently occupi ed. Mr. Gustafson responded that the Agency will have an obligation to relocate the tenants. He further stated staff has already notified the tenants that they may be eligible for relocation assistance. Mr. Gustafson stated he wanted to emphasize that on parcel 4, fee title would not be received but rather the lease is being purchased. As an option, the Agency could decide at any time to pursue purchase of fee title to that property. RESOLUTI ON OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN COX, the readi ng of the text was wai ved by unanimous consent, passed and adopted unanimously. - -' ~._. ,,_...__._."...-.-.__._-"_..,..,..._-_.._-,-~--- Redevelopment Agency -5- November 6, 1986 ITEM NO.5: RESOLUTI ON 746 ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATIONS ISSUED UNDER IS-87-20, IS-87-21, IS-87-22, IS-87-28 FOR THE ACQU IS ITI ON AND REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE TOWN CENTRE I REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFORE The Redevelopment Agency authori zed the acquisition of four properties on Church Avenue for the purpose of developing additional off street parking and the acquisition of the Wi ndmi II farms site and adjacent parcels for the purpose of consolidation for redevelopment. The Agency is requested to authori ze the appropri ati on of funds for the acqui si ti on of these properties and the payment of related acquisition, demolition and relocation expenses. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER McCANDLISS, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and adopted unanimously. ITEM NO.6: RESOLUTION 747 ADOPTING NEGATI VE DECLARATION ISSUED UNDER IS-86-48 AND ENTERING INTO AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH ROGER A.P. AND LAURIE M. JOSEPH FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MIXED-USE PROJECT (PARK SQUARE 11) AT 310 PARKWAY AND 378-398 THIRD AVENUE Joseph Development Company has proposed the removal of exi sting bui 1 di ng and construction of a commercial/residential mixed use project along Third Avenue between Parkway and "G" Street. The developer has been working with staff to develop a plan for the redevelopment of this site for over one year. The present project is a down-scaled version of the initial mixed-use proposal. Communi ty Development Speci al i st Davi es reported the Desi gn Revi ew COl1l11i ttee reviewed this project and made the following recommendations or additions to the Condi ti ons of Approval. (1) Recommend the detai 1 s of the 1 i ght fi xtures be reviewed and approved by staff. (2) The rocks proposed to be the Fine Arts Feature that would be directly adjacent to the sidewalk be deleted as a Fine Arts Feature. Mr. Davies further stated that Mr. Joe Martinez of Marti nez and Wong Associ ates is the archi tect for the project and is present and prepared to make a presentation. Mr. Marti nez addressed the Agency and descri bed the project using a model along with schematic designs. He stated it was his understanding that the Fine Arts Feature had a conceptual approval. Mr. Martinez introduced Mr. Roger Joseph, the developer of the project. Mr. Joseph spoke bri efly and stated the project has been scaled down considerably from the initial proposed project. - ----,.----_._- Redevelopment Agency -6- November 6, 1986 Chairman Cox asked what the time frame is for completion of the project. Mr. Joseph responded the project is planned for completion in the Fall of 1987, however, that will be difficult to meet. He stated he would like to start the project immediately. Member Campbell noted the buil di ng on the property now total s approximately 17 , 000 square feet. The proposed project is approximately 14,500 square feet. He asked if the differential was accounted for in the parking in the rear. Mr. Joseph responded the existing bui 1 di ngs had some second floor apartments. Basically a one level structure is bei ng proposed as opposed to what previously exi sted. Member McCandliss stated it was her intent in approving art feature requirements that it be identified as an art feature or cultural contribution as opposed to an extension of architecture. She questioned the proposed fine arts feature concept. Member McCandliss also had a question on the parking. In the Agenda Statement it states: since the project consi sts of redevelopment of an existing commercial building with a reduction in commercial space, the developer is not required to provide on-site parking for the commercial/retail component of the project or pay an in-lieu fee. Member McCandliss noted if this building was built today, additional parking would be required. She commented there should be some middle ground; 15 new spaces is clearly not enough. Member Malcolm stated that the developer proceeded to design and bring through a projl!ct with the rules that are presently existing. I f the Agency does not like the rules, now is not the time to prevent these people from going forward. Cha i n,lan Cox asked if there was any requirement in reference to alley improvements. Member Moore asked if the all ey property was transferred from the City to the owners. Community Development Director Desrochers stated The alley cannot be transferred over entirely to Joseph ownership. It is a public easement. Thi s was one of the inhibiting factors on the development of underground parking and a larger structure; not only the bulk but the fact of fire ingress and egress and the ownership of the alley. The developer needs to build according to City standards. Item #4 of the Owner Participation Agreement is the standard clause regarding their participation in special assessment districts such as an alley. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent. Member Moore stated the alley situation should be solved. If it is going to be redesi gned, or brought up to standards, and it is not all the property owner's responsibil ity, the Agency shoul d work with them and get it done simul taneously. Redevelopment Agency -7- November 6, 1986 Chairman Cox noted the need to make an addition to the Conditions of Approval. He suggested adding (i) Bringing back details of light fixtures for review and approval. It was noted that item h of the Conditions of Approval requires details of the fine art feature to be submitted to the Design Review Committee for review and approval. The resolution passed and was adopted unanimously. ITEM NO.7: RESOLUTION 748 AWARDING CONTRACT TO FRANK COOMBS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TRELLIS/BUS SHELTER LOCATED IN FRONT OF 367 THIRD AVENUE AND APPROPRIATING $4,050 THEREFOR Some months ago, a motorist ran into and demolished the trellis/bus shelter in front of Chul a Vista Photo (367 Thi rd Avenue). The Agency is requested to award a contract for reconstruction of the shel ter wi th new materi a 1 s in accordance with the original specifications for this project, and appropriate funds. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER McCANDLISS, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and adopted unanimously. ITEM NO.8: RESOLUTION 749 ACCEPTING DEED FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 230 CHURCH AVENUE IN CHULA VISTA AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO RECORD ACCEPTANCE OF THE DEED At the meeting of September 18, 1986 the Agency approved the purchase of property at 230 Church Avenue. Necessary escrow procedures have been followed and the seller has signed and had notarized a grant deed for the property to be transferred to the Agency. RESOLUTI ON OFFERED BY MEMBER MOORE, the readi ng of the text was wai ved by unanimous consent, passed and adopted unanimously. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Community Development Di rector Desrochers reported there wi 11 be an Agency meeting fo II owi ng the City Counci 1 meeti ng on November 12 regarding the EIR/EIS contract and project description for the Bayfront. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: None MEMBERS' COMMENTS: Member Moore di scussed the Otay Vall ey Road Project Area and whether or not there is a provi si on for temporary usage of 1 and in the Pl an. Redevelopment Coordi nator Kassman stated there is not a provi s i on for temporary usage in _.._._-----_.,------~----_.__.- ------ Redevelopment Agency -8- November 6, 1986 the plan or in the zoni ng ordi nance. Member Moore stated he wanted to bri ng this to the attention of the Agency. He stated it does not seem right that a property owner has the choi ce of ei ther not doi ng anythi ng wi th the property or being required to develop it within the high standards of a redevelopment project. Member Malcolm addressed Executive Di rector Goss referring to the letter before the Agency regarding signal timing. Member Malcolm stated there is a probl em throughout the City and asked why thi s is not bei ng taken care of. Mr. Goss stated a test is being conducted by consultants under the state grant which is experimenting with the timing of all the signal s between E and L Streets, Hilltop and Broadway. Staff has recei ved reports of problems and will be looking at it right away. The signal at Thi rd and F has changed; there has been a probl em regardi ng pedestri ans getti ng across the wi dth of Thi rd Street. ~Iember Malcolm further stated the new Counci 1 member is on the Executi ve Committee of the Sierra Club. Rather than sending a letter to the Sierra Club as di scussed at a previ ous meeti ng, it may be a better idea to have the new Council member be the second member along with the Mayor to sit down and talk with the Sierra Club in person. Member McCandl i ss commented since the 1 etter was so generally worded, it shoul d sti 11 be sent. She has a concern that the new Council member does not have the history of what has occurred the last few years. Agency Attorney Harron stated there are two matters of potenti a 1 litigation which need to be discussed under redevelopment in Closed Session. MSUC (Cox/McCandliss) to go into Closed Sessi on for purposes of di scussing potential litigation. ADJOURNMENT at 8:07 p.m. to City Council meeting; from City Council to Closed Session (8:08 p.m.); from Closed Session to meeting of November 12, 1986 following the City Council meeting. ~t~¡J Pau . Des rochers Community Development Director WPC 2571H - __ ·_.n.', ___,.____________..,_ _ ._.__....'n.._