The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutrda min 1985/12/10 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Tuesday, December 10, 1985 Counci 1 Chamber 8:25 p.m. Public Services Building ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chai rman Cox, Members Scott, McCandliss, Mal colm, Moore MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Executive Di rector Goss, Agency Attorney Harron, Community Development Di rector Desrochers, Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman l. RESOLUTION 646 OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ENTERING INTO AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH RENE AND PENNY MARIOTA FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 1,350 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL STORE AT 417 THIRD AVENUE The proposal is to locate a retail building at 417 Third Avenue. The recommendation is that the Redevelopment Agency approve the proj ect subject to the following conditions: a. Locate a vehicl e wheel stops where patrons and employees will not have to step over them when passing between vehicles. b. A landscape and irrigation plan will be requi red for both pl anter area concurrent with building permit submittals. c. The existing sign made of sandblasted wood may be utilized for this building if it meets the current Town Centre criteria. d. Alternate materials such as wood or block shall be utilized for Third Avenue marquee. This revision shall be brought back to staff for approval. In his report to the Council, Di rector of Communi ty Development Desrochers stated that the project has been approved by both the Design Review Committee and the Town Centre Project Area Committee. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent. - - -_..._._.._-_._._._._.._-_.._-_.~-,.. RA Minutes - 2 - December 10, 1985 Member Scott declared the Agency is making a big mistake if they support this particular resolution. He added the functi on of the Redevelopment Agency is to solve problems and not to create them and this particular item does not make sense from a redevelopment standpoint or a planning standpoint. Member Moore agreed this was not the best plan for the area. He indicated the Agency and staff have been overworked on other redevelopment projects such as the Bayfront, Otay Valley redevelopment area, the major shopping center, and now the feasi bi 1 ity of devel opi ng the redevelopment area along Broadway. He suggested this entire area be reevaluated. Chairman Cox said he met with the Mariota's today. They acqui red this property over one year ago and have gone through all the steps in order to develop it. Thi s a very di ffi cul t parcel to work wi th and staff has been working with the applicant on it. Member Scott stated there are options here--one is the consolidation of properti es. Mr. Mari ota testi fi ed that hi s family has been in the 1 ocati on at 361 Thi rd Avenue for approximately 30 years. They do not pl an to 1 eave the area; they plan to stay here for another 30 years. Tandem parking will leave spaces for employee parking. It gives them more spaces than they have now at the i r present location. There are al so 14 parki ng spaces on street, 90% of whi ch stay empty most of the time. The motion to approve the resolution carried with Member Scott voting "no." 2. STATUS REPORT - OTAY VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH STUDY At the Redevelopment Agency meeting of November 21, the Agency authorized the County Department of Heal th Servi ces to proceed with a vital stati stics survey and envi ronmental ri sk assessment for the Otay Vall ey Road area. The Agency withheld consideration of the formati on of a coordi nati ng committee to revi ew and gui de these studi es unti 1 the Otay Valley Road Project Area COlll11ittee had the opportuni ty to revi ew thi s issue. Director of Communi ty Development Des rochers submitted a report and the recommendations of the Project Area Committee. Member Moore stated this is a County problem and not a City problem. He noted the recommendati ons comi ng forth from the Project Area Committee concerning the role of the Committee declaring that it gives them undue responsibil ity. They have the responsibility for recommending appropri ate modifi cati ons of the study. Member Moore stated he cannot support this; rather than have the Committee make the modifications, this is something the Agency should be doing. Member McCandliss noted the Committee is advisory only--they would advise on the methodology of the health study only. - - -,--_.,-------, RA Minutes - 3 - December 10, 1985 Director of Community Development Desrochers stated the recommendations of the Committee are as follows: (l) That the Agency proceed with the formation of an advisory committee consisting of local residents, business, health professi onal s, scientists, and Ci ty staff to work wi th and coordi nate the efforts of those performing the various parts of the health survey. (2) That the Agency accept the aid of the County Depa rtment of Health Services in performing the vital statistics survey, with the proviso that the County work with the advisory committee, and that the committee review the proposals and recommend appropri ate modifications. (3) That the Agency accept the County Department of Health Services aid in performing a preliminary environmental risk assessment subject to possible modification and review by the advisory committee. (4) That the Agency di rect staff to i ni ti ate a study to determi ne means by which a health study could be performed, utilizing information obtai ned from school records, physi ci ans and pedi atri ci ans, local businesses and others to complete the survey and complement the vital statistics review and risk assessment components. (5) That the Agency forward to the advi sory committee the comments made at the PAC meeting of Novembe r 11 , 1985, regarding the vital statistics review and risk assessment for their consideration. Member McCandliss referred to recommendation #4 stating it was a mistake for the Agency to direct staff to i ni ti ate the study. The next step would be to determine whether or not a study is needed. MSUC (McCandliss/Scott) recommendation #4 be modified to request the Advi sory Committee and health professional s (County, S.D. State and Committee) to revi ew the ad vi sabi 1 ity of a health study and associ ated steps. Member Malcolm said he agrees with Member Moore's comments adding the Agency should be certain that the Committee is advisory only. Redevelopment Coordi nator Fred Kassman stated the recommendati ons of staff is only that the Committee be formed at thi s point and a report will be coming back with recommended names for the Committee members and change of the Committee. MSUC (McCandliss/Scott) to change the word "coordinate" to II revi ewu in recommendation #1. Recommendati on #2 - to change the word "appropri ate" to the word "possible" modifications. - - - -~-,-------_._-_.__._._._---- RA Minutes - 4 - December 10, 1985 MSC (Scott/McCandl i ss) to accept the report as modifi ed. Member Moore voted uno.lI 3. RESOLUTI ON 647 APPRO V I NG AN AGREEMENT WITH SEDWAY-COOKE ASSOCIATES FOR CONSULTING SERVICES FOR BAYFRONT PLANNING MATTERS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR In hi s report to the Agency, Di rector of Communi ty Development Desrochers stated that Sedway-Cooke Associ ates has performed consul ti ng services with regard to the Bayfront Redevelopment Project Area and the Agency has determined that further consul ti ng servi ces are needed in rel ation to the pl anni ng matters on the Bayfront area. Since Sedway-Cooke Associates has the necessary experti se to perform these addi ti onal services, the Agency di d not seek competitive bids and is recommending approval of the agreement wi th Sedway-Cooke Associates. Member Scott asked for a Closed Sessi on to di scuss thi s project pri or to taking acti on. MSUC (Cox/Scott) for a Closed Session pertaining to the Coastal Commission vs. Sierra Club and Section 404 Permit. The Agency recessed at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9:12 p.m. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed, and adopted unanimously. 4. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Community Development Di rector i ndi cated there may be a need for an addi ti ona 1 Agency meeting which could possibly be called prior to the Counci 1 meeti ng on the 17th and suggested a 6:00 p.m. meeting. The Agency members preferred having the meeting after the Council meeting and stated it should be scheduled as such. MSUC (Cox/Scott) to cancel the Agency meeti ng schedul ed for December 19 and have a joint City Council/Redevelopment Agency meeting on December 26 at 4:00 p.m. if necessary. ADJOURNMENT at 9:15 p.m. to the meeting scheduled for December 17 following the City Council meeting. ~.~~ 0705C/ak ,..- ... -..---...---.---..-....-- --,------.------