HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1985/03/21
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Thursday, March 21, 1985 Council Chambers
4:20 p.m. Public Services Building
ROLL CALL
MEMBERS PRESENT Chairman Cox; Members Scott, McCandliss, Moore
MEMBERS ABSENT Member Malcolm
STAFF PRESENT Executi ve Di rector Goss, Communi ty Development
Director Desrochers, Agency Attorney Harron,
Redevelopment Coordi nator Zegler, Pl anni ng
Director Krempl, Principal Pl anner Pass, Housi ng
Coordinator Gustafson
ITEM NO. 1 - REPORT: APPROV ING LAND USE PERMITS FOR THE EPISCOPAL COMMUNITY
SERVICES AND SOUTH BAY EDUCATIONAL SERVICES AT 314 PARK
WAY
Epi scopal Community Services and South Bay Educational Services have
requested Land Use Permi ts to locate counseling offi ces in an existing
building at 314 Park Way. The Redevelopment Pl an authori zes the Agency to
permit the establishment of such quasi-public uses within the Project Area.
The Project Area Commi ttee recommends approval of thi s proposal subject to
review of parking in 12 months.
Chairman Cox, noting a conflict of interest, left the meeting at this time.
In response to Member Moore's question, Mr. Jack Kuta, 59 "K" Street, Chula
Vi sta, property manager for the subject site, explained that the Episcop,al
Community Services woul d 1 ike to relocate their current offices from 516 'H"
Street to 314 Park Way.
Mr. Al Rodri quez, Program Di rector for Epi scopal Community Services, 3425
Fifth Avenue, San Di ego, added that there are currently 21 on-site parking
spaces at the Park Way location. Community Epi scopal Servi ces staffs
approximately 7 employees, therefore, ample parking is provided.
MSUC (Scott/McCandl iss) to recommend approval of the proposed 1 and use
subject to review of parking in 12 months and request that the Parking
Place Commission study parking turnover on Park Way with the possibility
of pl aci ng a time 1 imi t on street parki ng spaces. (The motion passed,
3-0-1; Chairman Cox abstained.)
----"- ----~~ --,-_._,-.'--
Adjourned Regular Meeting
of the Redevelopment Agency -2- March 21, 1985
ITEM NO. 2 - RESOLUTION NO. 573 - APPROVING AMENDMENT TO THE SUPPLEMENTAL
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND CENTRE CITY
ASSOC IATES AND MODIFYING THE SCHEDULE OF
PERFORMANCE
In accordance with the Di sposition and Development Agreement and subsequent
amendments between the Redevelopment Agency and Centre City Associates,
resi denti allot 8 will revert to Agency ownership if development pl ans and
commitments are not submitted by April 1, 1985. Concept plans and financial
data have been submi tted by the developer, and the Agency's housing
consultant is eval uati ng that information. However, financial commitments
will not be available to the Agency by the April 1 deadline.
Community Development Di rector Desrochers reported that the developer's
conceptual pl ans, on displ ay thi s afternoon, have not been reviewed by the
Design Review Committee.
Member Scott suggested that perhaps it would be in our best interest to open
up development of this parcel to other developers.
Michael Cowett, representing Centre City Associates, stated that according to
Pacific Scene (the previous joint venture partner), the project did not
"pencil out." He explained it was not a matter of financial feasibility for
Pacifi c Scene, rather the proj ec t simply did not suit thei r development
interests. Mr. logob has demonstrated a degree of persi stence unmatched to
anyone else in the City towards the development of this particular parcel.
Therefore, it seems appropriate to extend the deadline for financial
commitments.
In answer to Member McCandliss' question, Communi ty Development Di rec tor
Desrochers remarked that Mr. logob knows more about the sUbject property than
any current developer. If proposals were requested from other developers, it
may take more than 3 months to process. He indicated he woul d defer to the
Agency Attorney regarding legal ramifications.
Member McCandliss pointed out that we could incur higher project costs in the
future if we do not develop this parcel now.
Mr. Desrochers stated that the site is very well sui ted for rental
apartments, as the condo market appears to be saturated. He concurred wi th
Member McCandliss that future development costs will rise.
-- --------..------.----,---.-. '--'''-
Adjourned Regular Meeting
of the Redevelopment Agency -3- March 21, 1985
Mr. Cowett interjected that if the Agency solicited requests for proposals at
this time, the request would have to articulate today's market rate, which is
questi onabl e.
In response to the Chairman's question, Mr. Cowett stated that conceptual
approval by thi s agency is necessary in order to begi n di scussi ons from
financi al sources.
Member Scott, noting the good relationship with Mr. Zogob, remarked that this
particul ar parcel has been in the developer's control for too long and he
could anticipate at least one more extension request from him. Member
McCandliss concurred that she could not accept another extension request.
Mr. Dick Zogob, Centre City Associates, Limited, 315 Fourth Avenue, Chula
Vista, explained that he has been involved in this project for 7 years and
would like to see the successful conclusion to redevelopment of this Project
Area. He pointed out that some delays were the responsibility of the
Redevelopment Agency, and not the developer. He added that every facet of
residential development has been exhausted for this site. This is the best
design that has come forth to the Agency yet. He requested that the Agency
continue to be patient, in view of his past performance.
RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN COX, the reading of the text was waived by
unanimous consent, passed and adopted. (The resolution was adopted 3-1;
Member Scott opposed.)
Community Development Director Desrochers indicated the Design Review
Committee will not review the proposal until after amendments have been made
to the Disposition and Development Agreement, along with an analysis by the
Housi ng Consul tanto Therefore, he estimated desi gn revi ew to take pl ace in
June.
ITEM NO. 3 - RESOLUTION NO. 574 - ENTERING INTO AN OWNER PARTICIPATION
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AND RATNER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY FOR THE ISA
BUILDING
Ra tner Development Company has submi tted pl ans for the development of a
27,000 sq. ft. industrial buil ding at the southwest corner of "J" Street and
Bay Boulevard. The Design Review Committee has reviewed the proposal and a
Negative Declaration was prepared for the project.
Mr. Mike McDonald, Ratner Development Company, 2635 Camino del Rio South, San
Di ego, descri bed the Integrated Systems Analyst (ISA) bui 1 di ng. The Desi gn
Revi ew Committee has approved the desi gn; however, a new archi tect was
recently hi red who made sl i ght el evati on modificati ons to the desi gn. The
building footprint on the site, access, parking, and total square footage
remain constant, and exterior modifications to the building will be
resubmitted in about 10 days.
- -- -~-,-,._--_._-"--,--"--'._--'---"-'--
Adjourned Regular Meeting
of the Redevelopment Agency -4- March 21, 1985
RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIRMAN COX, the reading of the text was waived by
unanimous consent, passed and adopted unanimously. (The resolution was
adopted 3-0 with Member Scott abstaining.)
Staff noted that due to modifications to the exterior design of the building,
resubmittal of these plans will be made to the Design Review Committee.
ITEM NO. 4 - REPORT: AMENDING REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BY-LAWS
It was suggested that the Agency By-laws be amended in order for members to
recei ve compensati on for meeti ngs hel d on the same date as a Ci ty Counci 1
meeti ng. The By-laws should also be changed to state the days and locations
of the Agency meeti ngs. Upon acceptance of these amendments, a resol uti on
adopting same will be brought back to the Agency on April 18.
Member McCandliss remarked that she could not support additional compensation
for Agency meetings held immedi ately foll owing City Counci 1 meetings.
Particularly, since Agency members are already here for City Council meetings.
It was moved by Member McCandliss that the proposed change in the By-laws
"all owi ng Redevelopment Agency compensation only for meetings held
separate from Council meetings," be retained.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Member Scott agreed that Agency members should not be reimbursed for
attendance at meetings they are already attending; however, he did not feel
the additional $30 requested was substantial.
Discussion followed regarding 1 ength of Agency meeti ngs following regular
City Council meetings, inflationary aspects of costs per meeting, etc.
MSUC (Moore!McCandliss) to refer this item to staff.
At this time, the Redevelopment Agency convened jointly as the Redevelopment
Agency/City Council in order to consider the following item.
ITEM NO.5 - RESOLUTION NO. 575/ 11970 - APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN/DESIGN MANUAL
ADDENDUM TO THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
Staff has been working in conjunction with the Otay Valley Road Project Area
Committee for the past four months to develop the Implementation Plan/Design
Guidelines to guide development in the Otay Valley Area. This document will
be an addendum to the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan and work in concert
wi th the General Plan desi gnati on for the area in controll i ng proposed 1 and
uses and project design to ensure that the Otay Valley Area develops as a
hi gh-qual ity, li ght industrial area wi thout negative impacts on adj acent
re s i denti ala reas. The subject pl an has been approved by the Project Area
Commit tee, and reviewed and approved by the Planning and Communi ty
Development Department staffs. On March 13, 1985, the Pl anni ng Commi ssi on
held a public hearing on the plan and subsequently approved it.
_____, ______.__m_..-
Adjourned Regular Meeting
of the Redevelopment Agency -5- March 21, 1985
Community Development Director Desrochers introduced four of the five members
of the Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee in attendance this afternoon.
Mr. Desrochers reported that these guidelines should provide the flexibility
to ensure good development and compatibility with adjacent areas.
Development Specialist Kassman reported that the Project Area Committee began
meeting on October 9, 1984. A total of nine meetings, in excess of 30 hours,
was spent by the Committee working on this particular report. The guidelines
were subsequently approved on February 11, 1985. The Planning Department's
comments were added to the plan after approval by the Project Area Committee,
and then were forwarded to the Planning Commission.
Pri ncipal Pl anner Pass descri bed the pri ncipal features of the pl an noting
that special emphasis be made on the landscaping requirements. According to
the guidel ines, 2m of the site should be devoted to landscaping.
Furthermore, the City Landscape Architect will playa major role in assuring
that open space is provided in developments and special permits are processed.
Di scussi on foll owed regardi ng the ill ustrated procedure for processi ng of
development and subdi vi si on proposal s before the Pl anni ng Commi ssi on, the
Project Area Committee, the Design Review Committee, and the Redevelopment
Agency.
Member/Co unci 1 man Scott asked if the subdivi si on projects coul d go di rectly
from the Project Area Commi ttee for approval j oi ntly by the Planni ng
Commission/ Redevelopment Agency. In response, Principal Planner Pass
commented that communi ty redevelopment 1 aw does not stipul ate that thi s
cannot occur, however, he deferred to the Agency Attorney for clarification
on thi smatter.
Planning Director Krempl stated that although this procedure does seem
somewhat cumbersome and repetitive, State law indicates that the City Council
is the final body to act on a subdivision map. However, since it is in a
redevelopment area, consistency of the plans and findings must be made by the
Redevelopment Agency. Therefore, thi s procedure is depi cted on the flow
chart as a final step. Agency Attorney Harron requested additional time in
order to verify this procedure.
Agency/City Attorney Harron expressed concern that the Project Area Committee
should not be involved with conducting environmental reviews. Therefore, the
Planning Commission has been included in this process.
Pl anni ng Di rector Krempl reported that the Pl anni ng Commi ssi on revi ewed the
guidelines and recommended adoption by a vote of 5-2. The Commission felt
comfortable with adoption of the guidelines due to their flexibility.
However, they did have a concern regarding verbiage, such as: there should be
1 ess "shall s" and more "shoul ds" and "mays."
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared
open.
+---..- --',....-
Adjourned Regular Meeting
of the Redevelopment Agency -6- March 21, 1985
Mr. Tim Flannery, H. G. Fenton/Nelson Sloan, explained that the companies own
approximately 60 acres within the Redevelopment Area south of Otay Valley
Road on the eastern end of the area. He expressed his appreciation of
staff's notification of property owners. He indicated the companies' support
for quality light industrial development in the area. However, several major
aspects of the plan were noted, including: minimum lot size, lot frontage of
200 1 ineal feet, rear yard setback of 50 feet, 40-foot setback for Otay
Valley Road, 2m landscaping, and the maximum buil ding footprint of 45% of
the lot. He expressed concern that if the land is dropped further south, a
problem would occur with remaining land to be developed. He expressed
concern that the cost of development could not be economically justified
because of the high cost of the required infrastructure. In conclusion, the
guidelines appear to be the strictest in the County, and he therefore
suggested that the Agency adopt a set of standards that coul d be more
fl exible.
Mr. Craig Beam, 110 West "A" Street, San Diego, representing
Darl i ng-Del aware, commented that the gui del i nes do not appear to be very
flexible, particularly relating to minimum lot size requirements. Because of
these restrictions, marketing of a piece of property may also be hampered.
Mr. Beam suggested the language should be clarified in various areas of the
manua l. On page 10, subsecti on 1 "Lot Si ze and Frontage," the 1 ast paragraph
under this subsection should be relocated to precede that entire subsection.
Mr. Robert McCrary, 251 South Lake Avenue, Pasadena, California, representing
Chillingworth Company, remarked that the Darling-Delaware Company is strongly
in favor of development guidelines for the Otay Valley Road Area. He
suggested that additional study of the guidel ines be made to see how they
actually affect a site design such as theirs. Mr. Beam interjected that the
gui del ines are structured as to di scourage potenti al developers before they
can actually get into the text of the manual. He emphasized the need for
quality in this area; however, the company does have marketing constraints.
Planning Director Krempl informed the Agency that the tentative map for the
Darl ing-Delaware site will be submitted to the Pl anning Commission next
week. At this time, the Planning Department recommends denial of the
request. The comparisons made by the Darling-Delaware Company and exhibited
this afternoon were not designed in consideration of the Otay Valley
guidel ines.
Chairman/Mayor Cox noted that this particular site has some unique features
that don't exist in other areas of the redevelopment project. It is the only
parcel with a tentative map and the only site utilized by Omar Rendering as a
dump site. Therefore, the map should not be precluded from being continued.
Mr. Di ck Kau, 3404 Boni ta Road, Chul a Vi sta, representi ng property owners,
Mr. and Mrs. Shinohara, pointed out that the redevelopment in this area would
eliminate 10 acres of land currently owned by the Shinoharas. He added that
the guidelines appear to be very stringent.
Adjourned Regular Meeting
of the Redevelopment Agency -7- March 21, 1985
Mr. Lee Curry, Crown Chemical Corporation, 1888 Nirvana Avenue, Chula Vista,
di scussed the correspondence dated March 20, 1985, by hi s attorney, Gregory
Garratt, distributed this afternoon. Basically, the correspondence addresses
health, safety, and welfare regulations of public agencies and expansion of
exi sting uses.
Planning Director Krempl stated that these concerns have not been addressed
in the Redevelopment Plan. Staff suggests that this issue be referred to the
Project Area Committee since Pl anning staff has not had time to review the
document.
Mr. Jeff Wissler, Sammis Properties, 2650 Cami no del Rio North, San Diego,
described their 40-acre development on Otay Vall ey Road, the triangular
parcel that would be eliminated in the center of this development, lot size
addressed in the new guidelines, uses in the project that are not compatible
with the surrounding community. He suggested flexibility be provided for the
lot size issue.
Mr. Don Heye, Chairman of the Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee,
described the function of the Project Area Committee to date. He i ndi cated
that a letter was mailed to 17 property owners regarding the role of this
Committee, and as a resul t of input from vari ous property owners,
observations by the Committee, etc., this Committee took on the charge of
reviewing the guidelines. Mr. Heye agreed that the desi gn gui del i nes are
very restrictive, and at the same time they are very flexible. The Committee
felt strongly about off-street parking (i.e., areas deteriorated due to large
vehicles parked on streets for long periods of time). One of the principal
considerations of the Committee concerned owner-occupant as opposed to
property with an absentee or temporary owner. Therefore, larger developments
and lot sizes were proposed in the gui del i nes. In addition, the
redevelopment guidel ines will address the use of every possible safeguard
against hazardous waste disposal.
In answer to Chairman/Mayor Cox's question, Mr. Heye indicated that the
Sammis Properties proposal was informally discussed by the Proj ect Area
Committee. Chairman Heye expressed concern with 1 imited lot size. The
majority of the Sammis Properties lots are one acre or less. He asked Mr.
Heye if the Sammis development is the type that would benefit what the City
is trying to accomplish in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area. In
response, Mr. Heye rei terated that this project was brought before the
Committee before the lot size issue was considered.
Member/Councilman Scott suggested consi deri ng a sliding scal e that would
address the minimum lot size dilemma.
Member/Councilwoman McCandliss poi nted out that the goal of this
redevelopment area is to have an industrial area that is compatible with the
surrounding areas as well as being aesthetically pleasing. She expressed
concern that a potential developer may not get past the extreme standards of
the guidelines and therefore would not see its flexibilities.
'_'_'n'_"_ ____..________._._'.,.,._., ________
Adjourned Regular Meeting
of the Redevelopment Agency -8- March 21, 1985
It was moved by Chairman Cox to include "the above guidelines and objectives
of the Redevelopment Pl an" as part of the first paragraph to subsecti on 4
entitled "Site Design."
Member/Co unci lman Scott remarked that Mr. Beam's interpretation was
incorrect. To rearrange the sentence structuri ng in that parti cul ar secti on
of the guidelines would change the whole meaning and intent of staff.
Chairman/Mayor Cox withdrew his motion.
Agency/City Attorney Harron advised that the standards as outlined in the
guidelines are meant to be directory. Changing all the "shoul ds" to "shall s"
would, in fact, change staff's intent. Therefore, the language should remain
as is.
Member/Councilwoman McCandliss stressed the need for high standards for this
area. She expressed concern with the 2-acre minimum lot size; however, it
woul d not be prudent to scatter l-acre sites throughout the Project Area
ei ther.
MSUC (Scott/Moore) to refer the changes as suggested by Mr. Garratt to
staff and the Project Area Committee and investigate the use of a sliding
scale for a certain size subdivision.
Agency/City Attorney Harron recommended adoption of the resolution as
modifications could COme back at a later date. He added that the guidelines
bridged the gap between general planning and zoning.
RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER McCANDLISS, the readi ng of the text was
waived by unanimous consent, passed and adopted unanimously.
Di scussi on foll owed regardi ng appropri ate 1 and uses within the sensitive
impact boundaries of the Redevelopment Area.
MSUC (Cox/Moore) to direct staff to i nvesti gate whether or not there
woul d be appropri ate 1 and uses wi thi n the sensitive impact zone that
would be inconsistent with our desires of protecting adjacent residential
areas, and direct staff to consider a definition of what is included in
landscaping and make sure we come up with some consistency regarding what
is defi ned as 1 andscapi ng (and refer thi s to the Project Area Committee
as well).
Chairman Cox commended the Project Area Committee on its time and effort in
reviewing the subject guidelines.
CHAIRMAN'S/MAYOR'S COMMENTS:
a. Chairman/Mayor Cox suggested a Closed Session following the Industrial
Development Authority meeting for potential litigation.
MSUC (Cox/Scott) to adjourn to Closed Session for possible 1 itigation
following the Industrial Development Authority meeting.
Adjourned Regular Meeting
of the Redevelopment Agency -9- March 21, 1985
b. The Chai rman/Mayor announced that the Coastal Conservancy approved a
grant for $50,000 to fund the Environmental Management Plan for the
Bayfront.
MEMBER/COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Member/Councilwoman McCandl i ss di scussed the proposed McDonald's/Sixpence
sign recently approved by the Planning Commission.
MSUC (McCandliss/Scott) to appeal the approval of the McDonald's/Sixpence
sign to the City Council for review and waive the appeal fees.
DIRECTOR/MANAGER COMMENTS:
a. Di rector/City Manager Goss noted that the vi deotape of the recent Chul a
Vista tour/film by a local television station would be available for
viewing this afternoon.
b. Di rector/Ci ty Manager Goss noted that he will be attending a City
Manager's conference in Ramona next week. The Assi stant Ci ty Manager
will also be in attendance.
c. Staff discussed the appl ication to the Coastal Commi ssi on for a permi t
for placing fencing around the designated Least Tern sanctuary on the "0"
Street fill.
MSUC (Cox/Moore) to concur wi th staff in their s ubmi tta 1 of permit
application for fencing of a Least Tern sanctuary on the "D" Street fill,
and concur with a request of the Unified Port Di stri ct to allow
continuation of the fencing across thei r property--that they have
concurred with our Least Tern island and channel.
ADJOURNMENT at 6:52 p.m to Closed Session (foll owi ng the Industri al
Development Authority meeti ng immediately following this meeti ng). The
Recordi ng Secretary was excused and the Executive Di rector reported that
Closed Session ended at 7:25 p.m.
WPC 1499H
----.----.- ---.--.----.-----.-