Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1992/09/15 RDA SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, September 15, 1992 Council Chambers 7:45 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO QRDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: CouncilmembersfMembers Horton, Malcolm, Moore, Rindone, and Mayor/Chairman Nader ALSO PRESENT: Jim Thomson, Deputy City Manager; Bruce M. Boogsurd, City/Agency Attorney; and Berlin Bosworth, Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency 2. APPROVAL OF M]N1J'I'E$: September 1, 1992 MSC (Moore/Rindone) to approve the minutes of September 1, 1992 as presented. Approved 4-0-1 with Malcolm absent. CON~NT CALENDAR No items submitted. PUBLIC REARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS 3. RESOLUTION 1269 APPROVING A LEASE AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY CREDIT UNION FOR THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 321 AND 327 H $'I'REET V~ITHIN THE TOWN CENTRE I PROJECT AREA At the applicant's request, the item was continued to the next regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency; October 6, 1992 at 4:00 p.m., immedi~,ely following the City Council meeting, Council Chambers, Public Services Building. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. MSC (NaderfMoore) to continue the public hearing to a date and llme certain, that being October 6, 1992 at 4:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting 40-1 (Malcolm absen0. 4. ~ APPROVING A LICENSE FOR TH]~ USE OF 2.63 ACRES OF A(~ENCY- OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 350 THROUGH 368 BAY BOULEVARD WITH ROHR, INC. At the applicant's request, the item was continued to the next regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency; October 6, 1992 at 4:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, Council Chambers, Public Services Building. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. Minutes September 15, 1992 Page 2 MSC (Nader/Moore) to continue the public hearing to a date and time certain, that being October 6, 1992 at 4:00 p.m, immediately following the City Council meeting 4-0-1 (Malcolm absent). 5. RESOLUTION 1275 CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CHULA VISTA AUTO CENTER PROJECT (E1R 91-01; SCH #91061074) - The Final EIR includes all public and governmentel agencies' comments and associated responses, as text changes to the Drai~ EIR. Text changes are clearly indicated with :..~2:z cu: (deletions) and underline (additions to text) in the Final EIR. The Planning Commission em'tiffed at their December 4, 1991 meeting that the Final EIR was prepared pursuant to CEQA and recommended its certification to the Agency. The Agency is requested to certify the Final ELR prior to a joint public hearing by the Council/Agency on approvals necessary to implement the Auto 5ales Park Project. Staff recommends approval of the resolution, (This resolution did not require a public hearing but is related to public hearing Item g6.) Mr. Saiomone presented a brief staff overview, pointing out that per Council's direction the project was being 'fast tracked". Certification was recommended by the p]annlng Commission in December 1991 after the Resource Conservation Commission made its recommendation for certification to the Planning Commission, and determination made that all CEQA requirements had been covered as to public review and input. He noted that changes made to Resolution 1276 were contained in the 'errata sheet' handed out at the meeting. One significant unmitigable impact, the loss of agricultural land, was noted in staff's report. The EIR also spoke to, in $ummary, some cumulative significant impacts and staff felt that, to fully comply with CEQA, staff would like Council to make Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding those cumulative impacts. Those impacts were identified in Resolution 1276, page 18, and it made the Finding that beyond the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR which reduced the impacts, no other feasible resources were available which reduced the cumulative impacts below a level of significance. Those were generally regionally significant impacts that were being approached on a regional basis. Chairman Nader noted that he continued to have a concern that Council was adopting ELRs and Statement of Overriding Considerations reflecting the erroneous assumption that no further mitigation of air quality impacts could occur. He went on to say there were several mitigation measures that had not been fully discussed or considered. He suggested that the Findings be amended to reflect that Council could continue exploring such mitigation(s) and could include, but not be limited to, amending the General Plan, Transportation Management Authority, trip generation rights and the market therefore. All were potential mitigation measures. MOTION: (NaderfHorton) Amend the proposed Findings to indicate that potential air quality mitigation measures would continue to be explored. Member Malcolm stated he had an objection to the openendedness in the Chairman's statement. He noted a specific problem being that if Council was to find Statement of Overriding Conditions then Council could not say they were going to be looking at additional items later on; however, Member Malcolm noted he had no problem with the intent of the motion. He asked Agency's General Counsel l~ooganrd if it might raise any legal issues. Agency General Counsel Boogsard responded that if the recommendation wes that Council take as a matter of policy at~er the item and encourage staff in all future projects where there were cumulative significant impacts that were not mitigated, as a matter of policy, continue to pursue mitigation measures which may not reduce it to a level of less than significant, but may reduce it to some extent. Chairman Nader, in deference to Agency General Counsel Boogeard's statement, withdrew his motion. He further noted that Council had given that direction before and it needed to be enforced. Staff needed to exercise more Minutes September 15, 1992 Page 3 oversight with consultants. MOTION WITltDRAWN: (Nader) RESOLUTION 1275 OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-1 with Nailer opposed. 6.(A) Joint A~ency/Councll PUBLIC HEARING SALE OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY-OWNKD PROI~_,RTY ACQUIRED WITH TAX INCREMENT WUNDS LOCATED AT 4705 OTAY VAIJ.EY ROAD WITHIN THE OTAY VALLF. Y ROAD RF~DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TO DGFFAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND DANIEL D. ORDWAY, CHRISTINA L. ORDWAY, TRAVIS A. RENEAU, AND MARGARET L. RENEAU FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AN AUTO SAI.F-$ PARK AND TIAE SA!-F~ OF SAID PROPERTY WfI~OUT PUBLIC BIDDING - Section 33433 of the California CommtmJty Redevelopment Law, Health and Safety Codes, states that the Legislative Body must bold a public hearing and approve the sale of any property acquired by the Agency using tax increment funds. Notice of the time and place of the public hearing was published in a newspaper- of general circulation (The Star Ne~s) in the community for two successive weeks (September 5 and September 12, 1992, respectively) prior to the public hearing. A S.mmnry Report including the terms and conditions of the sale along with the final draft copy of the Disposition and Development Agreement has bean available at the Office of Community Development as well as the Office of the City Clerk for public review and copying. - Section 33431 of the California Community Redevelopment Law, Health and Safety Codas, reqnir~ that any sale or lease of property by the Agency may be made without public bidding only after a public hearing noticed in a local newspaper not less than once a week for two weeks prior to the hearing. The notice was published in a newspaper of general circulation in the community (The Star Ne~s) on September 5 and September 12, 1992, respectively). Mr. Salomone requested clarification from Agency General Co~l Boogaard as to whether the City's resolution regarding the Mitigation Monitoring Program (Section 33433) needed to be considered prior to considering the project. Agency General Counsel Boogeard recommended open~g the hearing, take public testimony, the Mitigation Monitoring Program mitigation mcesures, and make all the Findings when Resolution 1276 was adopted. Council needed to do 6A (open the joint public hearing), act on 6B (adopt Council Rasolution 16506), and then act on 6C (adopt Agency Resolution 1276). 6.(B) COUNCIL RESOLUTION 16806 APPROVING, Ai~-rl~R PUBLIC HEARING, THE SALF. OF CERTAIN AGENCY-OWNED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4705 OTAY VALLEY ROAD WfrmN TItE OTAY VALLF-Y ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TO DGF FAMILY LIMIrI'ED PARTNERSHI~ AND DAVID D. ORDWAY, CHRISTINA L. ORDWAY, TRAVIS A. RENEAU~ AND MARGARET L. RENEAU FOR 'l'l~.~ INSRPOSE OF DEVELOPING AN AUTO SALES PARK SUBJECT TO TH~ TERMS AND CONDITIONS IN THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES; MAKING CEQA FINDINGS; APPROVING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS; AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM - Subject to the Public Hearing (6(A]), the Council is requested to approve the sale of Agency-ownad or to be acquired Property (4705 Otay Valley Road) to the Auto Sales Park Developers subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the DDA. Additionally the Council is asked to make statutory CEQA Findings, approve a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Minutes - September 15, 1992 Page 4 Program. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. 6.(C) AGENCY RESOLUTION 1276 FINDING AND DETERMINING, PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT LAW, HEAL'IH AND SAFETY CODES, SECTION 33431, THAT IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC AND THE AGENCY THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY BE SOLD TO DGF FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, DAVID D. ORDWAY, CHRISTINA L. ORDWAY, TRAVIS A. RENEAU, AND MARGARET L. RENEAU ("AUTO SALES PARK DEVELOPERS") WITHOUT ]rlJBLIC BIDDING, MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT RELATING TO ~ FEASIBILITY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND PROJECT ALTERNATIVES, ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND APPROVING A DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Wi1H THE AUTO S.$1.~S PARK DEVELOPERS AND AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE SAME - The Agency is requested to approve the sale of the Property (4705 Otay Valley Road) to the Auto Sales Park Developers without public bidding, approve the Disposition and Development Agreement, make requisite statutory CEQA Findings, and approve the Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring Program. S~T ro~omme~nds approval of the resolution. Mr. Saiomons presented a brief overview of the project, noting the project, in general, involved the acquisition of two auto dealerships, Fuller Ford and South Bay Chevrolet, on Broadway by the Agency; the acquisition of the Shinohara property, 4705 Otsy Valley Road; the transfer of that property to the Auto Sales Park Developers represented by those two dealerships; and a loan to the Agency by the Developers because the loan value would be written down which would be repaid to those auto dealers out of the sales tax revenues generated by the project. He further stated staff envisions the South Bay Chevrolet dealership opening at the Auto Sales Park in Fall 1993, followed shortly by Fuller Ford, and hopefully in 1994, the Honda dealership, as well as another dealership, yet to be determined; four dealerships within a two-year span and staff saw potential for expansion to both the east and west of additional dealerships. Actions taken were contingent on future actions: the settlement of the Otay Valley Road Widening Project Assessment District, approval by the Agency of a Special Use Permit, the readerboerd sign or street name change, and the possibility of soils contamination or water contamination during grading, all of which must be brought to satisfactory conclusion prior to close of escrow. Member Rindone asked what would be the potential long-term buildout and the number of dealerships. Mr. Salomone responded that there was a reasonable expectation of expansion to the east of the site of three, and possible four dealerships and to the west, one to three additional dealerships. There was the potential of nine dsalecships in the Auto Sales Park. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. There being no public testimony, the public hearing was closed. Agency Special Counsel Ken $ohnson of Shappurd, Mullin, Richter, and HRmpton advised of minor chimges made te the Disposition and Development Agreement. Agency General Counsel Boogeard requested that the second section of Resolution 1276 wherein it approved the agreemem in the form it was presented, including verbal preseotetions made at the City Council meeting by staff and outside Counsel, be included within said resolution. Understanding that the errata sheet items identified by Mr. Salomone for both Resolution 16806 and Resolution 1276 would also be included in the amended resolutions. Minutes September 15, 1992 Page 5 Agency Special Counsel Johnson requested the following language be added to the last sentence to the Statement of Overriding Consideration.s, Resolution 1276, pnge 22: "...and that in furtherance of the goals of the Radevelopment Plan and the General Plan, urban growth is contemplated at this site and would have the same sorts of cumulative impacts. ' Chairman Nader asked if it was necessary to edd the language, and whether there was an EIR done for an industrial use for the site. He asked Agency Special Counsel Johnson if the amendment was really necessary as Council/Agency already stated the unmitigated impacts and overriding considerations to justify. Member Malcolm pointed out that while there might not be a project-specific EIR, a general EIR was done for the Otey Valley Road Project when the Redevelopment Agency was formed, with the contemplated lend use isstm~. In the general EIR for the area, the industrial zoning would have equal to or greater cumulative impacts. Agency Special Counsel Johnson responded that it was important to addreas both: there were two sets of unmitigated ira?acts, one was an agriculture loss and the other was cumulative impacts. MOTION: (Malcolm/Moore) Add the language as read by Agency Special Counsel Johnson to the last sentence, Resolution 1276, page 22, Statement of Overriding Considerations. Motion passed, 4-0-1, with Nader opposed. This being the time and place as edvertised, the publ/c hearing was declared open. There being no public testimony, the public hearing was closed. Member Malcolm commented on the two overriding conditions. Fi~t, regarding loss of agriculture land: they were not prime, Class I or 2, agricultural lands and given the existing water situation the cost of water for agriculture in this area was prohibitive, it was not economically feasible to farm. Secondly, regarding air quality even though it was a non-attainment area, neither the federal or state govemmants were regulating cars COming across the border. One percent of the traffic was from across the border, but causing 10 percent of the air pollution from automobiles because of the lack of treatment of gasolines in Mexico. The proposed project for the property was probably one that would generate less traffic than that which had already been approved by the City Council at an earlier date on industrial zoning, as well as the reasons for finding overriding COnsiderations which had to do with the fact of jobs (retention and creation) and sales tax revenues the dealerships would provide to the City of Chula Vista. COUNCIL RESOLUTION 16806 AND AGENCY RESOLUTION 1276 OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. Member Malcolm noted that last week he privately complimented Mr. Salomone, the individuals in the City Manager's Office who worked on this project, and Mr. Jim Salter, Consultant on the project, but that there was one person on staff that really deserved special credit and recognition, and a bonus if the project worked and a hanging if it did not, and that was Fred Kassman. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. ACTION ITEM~ Minutes September 15, 1992 Page 6 None submitted. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Items pulled: None. OTHER BUSINESS 7. CITY MANAGER/DIRECTOR'S REPORT Downtown Business Manager: Mr. Jim Thomson, Deputy City Manager, pointed out that staff had provided an informational memorandum noting that staff would return to the October 6, 1992 meeting with a full report. 8. MAYOR/CHAIRMAN'S REPORT - None. 9. COUNCILMEMBERS/MEMBERS' COMMENTS Member Moore wanted staff to put a referral on the next Agency's meeting under Members' Comments regarding the ownership of streets in the Bayfront that abut Rohr from various different directions. He stated that when the - City did the update of the shopping center and closed Fifth Avenue, the City found out that half of Fifth Avenue did not belong to the City because of some error that was made years and years ago. He wanted information on: Who owns them?, What is the width, and so forth? It was timely so therefore he was asking that the Agency consider that as a voting item at the next meeting. He was also concerned about who owned H Street, what part of it was a paper street, and if any part of it was dedicated to the City. Same with G Street, Bay Boulevard, all the streets that abut Rohr, including the one that meanders from F Street all the way over. Member Rindone mentioned that there was legislation pending for redevelopment, which for future projects could have impact on schools as they relate to redevelopment projects and that was the potential that cash given to School Districts for projects could be, in effect, abated by proposed legislation which would say that would decrease the ADA (Avesage Daily Attendance) paid and thereby there would be no incentive for that purpose. It was an effort by the State of California to get a lot of redevelopment funds returned to the state. Sust as an admonition to staff, and particularly to alert the Agency, for future projects when they involve schools and redevelopment funding, the way to best address that would be to have the Redevelopment Agency do the projects and than turn them over to School Districts. It had not happened (the Legislation being passed) but it was pending and was only a matter of time. He requested that staff look into the legislation, and, at the very least, give the Agency an Inform*tion Report. There was no sense jeopardizing the loss of Redevelopment funds to School Districts when it could be done and both School Districts and Redevelopment Agencies could benefit. Mayor Nader ask if it was in any way related to the legislation that was on the Governor's desk which would e{imln~te the ability of School Districts and cities to charge development fees for schools. Member Rindone responded that he did not know if it was tied in. He would have to defer to staff. The legislation he was referring to was on the Governor's desk. It was potentially very serious, and cash payment was not the way to go with School Districts and Redevelopment Agencies. Mayor Nader stated he desh'ed staff review all bills (legislation) that had been mentioned, for consistency or Minutes September 15, 1992 Page 7 inconsistency with the City's adopted legislative program and commtll~qat~ with the Governor accordingly. ADJOURNMENT The special joint meeting of the Redevelopment Agency/City Council adjoumad at 8:28 p.m. to a special meeting of the Redevelopment Agency on September 22, 1992 at 6:00 p.m., Council Chambers, in the Public Services Building. Respectfully submitted, Berlin D. Bosworth, Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency