Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1990/09/18 RDA NOTE: The Redevelopment Agency meeting was held following the Council meeting on this date. See page 12 for the Agency' minutes. MF~JTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ~t-J¥ OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, September 18, 1990 Councii Chambers 6:02 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL GALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers Malcolm, McCandliss, Moore, Nader, and Mayor Cox ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, CityAttorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. PLEDGE OF AI.I.~G[ANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 16, August 30, and September 4, 1990 MSC (Moore/Malcolm) to approve the minutes of August 16, August 30, and September 4, 1990 as presented. Approved 5-0-0 with Councilman Malcolm abstaining on 8/30/90, Mayor Cox abstaining on 9/4/90, and Councilwoman McCandliss abstaining on 8/16/90, due to absences from indlcated meetings. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: a. Proclaiming the Weeks of September 16 through October 7, 1990 as 'CO~' . The proclamation declaring the weeks of September 16 through October 7, 1990 as "COASTWEEKS" will be presented by Mayor Cox to Dr. Stephen Neudecker, Director of the Nature Interpretive Center. Mayor Cox noted that Harbor Days would be held on Saturday, September 29th. There will be a parade of tall ships which will include the California along with booths set up at the Chula Vista Harbor. The State Coastal Conservancy will also be holding their meeting on Friday night at the Chula Vista Yacht Club to consider a grant for preliminary planning for the Southbay Bike Route. b. Presentation of award of merit for Rancho del Rey Project - Ken Baumgartner, stated the Rancho del Rey project received two awards of merit for their site plans for SPA I and SPA II from the Pacific Coast Builders Conference. He presented copies of the plaques to the Mayor and expressed their thanks to the-City and staff for working with McMillin on these projects. c. Presentation by PLAN in conjunction with the Coalition to Beat the Builders' Initiatives against Proposition M (San Diego City Traffic Control and Comprehensive Growth Management Initiative) and Proposition D (the San Diego County version of the same initiative). Pete Coffman, representing PLAN, asked Council to join the City of San Diego, the County Board of Superx4sors, and Sierra Club in working together to defeat Proposition M and Proposition D. He then gave a brief review of the position taken by PLAN. Mayor Cox responded that those in support of Proposition D and M have contacted the City and will be scheduled for a later meeting. MINUTES -2- September 18, 1990 d. Mayor Cox informed Gouncil that the Robert H. Scheuler Auxiliary ro Post #2111, the Ladies Auxiliary of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, has presented a flag in recognition of MIA/POW Day which is September 21st, and will be flown over City Hall on that day. CONSENT C~I.~NDAR (Items pulled: Sc, 9, 12 and 13) BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CAI.ENDAR O~'FI~IF.D BY MAYOR COX, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimonsly with Councilmembers Malcolm and Nader voting no on Item #11. 5. WRi i-iKN COMMUNICATIONS: a. Request for waiver of dedication requirement for Southwest comer of ~I' Street and Glover Avenue - Michael A- Green, Attorney at Law, 535 ~H" S~'eet, Chula Vista, California 92010, representing Victor Uranga, M.D. and Gil Turullas. Recommended that the request be referred to staff for a report back to Council. b. Request to have City of Chula Vista review trash pickup fee increase by Laidlaw Waste Systems - Nona Franklin, Post Office Box 655, Chula Vista, California 92012. Recommended that staff respond to the writer as appropriate. c. Request for public access to the pond bordering the Chula Vista Municipal Golf Gourse - Peter F. Xander, 1845 East 16th Street, National City, California 92050. Recommended that staff be directed to contact American Golf and encourage the golf course operator to work out a process to that those wishing to fish at the pond could do so. Pulled from Consent Calendar Councilman Malcolm questioned whether the ponds were safe for children to be around and whether the fish being caught were safe for consumption. City Manager Goss responded that he had been advised by the City Attorney that the City could not discourage such usage. Therefore, staff recommended the golf course operator work with staff and those requesting usage of the ponds. City Attorney Boogaard responded that a governmental entity can consider safety factors. The referral was not to discourage the consideration of safety factors, it was hoped the golf course operator could work it out rather than having the City get involved. Councilman Malcolm felt American Golf should be told that there were safety issues that needed r8 be addressed. MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) to accept the staff' recommendations with the proviso that American Golf be notified about the safety concerns. The City Attorney is to notify Council as to whether there would be a liability to the City. d. Request for traffic control at the intersection of Corral Canyon and Country Vistas - Rick Phillips, Board Secretary, Bonita Highlands Homeowne~s Association, Post Office Box 458, Bonita, California 92002. Recommended that the request be referred to staff and the Safety Commission for study. e. Memorandum regarding vacancies on the Board of Ethics - Brnce M. Boogaard, City Attorney. Recommended that the vacancies be filled through the posting and establishment of a new eligibility list. MINUTES - ~ -3- September 18, 1990 f. Request to use a temporary promotional banner and Ronald McDonald balloon to celebx-ate the Bonitafest activities - Robert R. Sutherland, Sutherland Management Company, 4394 Bonita Road, Bonita, California 92002. Recommended that the request from McDonald's for use of a promotional banner and balloon to celebrate Bonitafest be f'fled. g. Letter of resignation from the Resource Conservation Commission . Frank Chidester, 38 East Donohoe Street, Chula Vista, California. Recommended that Mr. Chidester's resignation from the Resource Conservation Commission be accepted with regret and a letter of appreciation be sent. h. Letter of resignation from the Youth Commission - Scan Smith. Recommended that Mr. Smith's resignation from the Youth Commission be accepted with regret and a letter of appreciation be sent. 6. RESOLUTION 15849 ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION AND FRINGE BENEFTr PLAN FOR SECRETARY TO MAYOR AND CITY COISNCIL. The position listed is recommended for a 5% salary increase effective 7/13/90, and an increase in the market basket from $3,850 to $4,500, which represents the same dollar increase as received by CVEA, middle-managers and other unclassified/unrepresented positions ($650). Mayor recommends approval of the resolution. (Mayor) 7. RESOLUTION 15850 ACCEPTING A G1FT OF PROPERTY FROM JIMMIE SHiNOHARA AND SUDi SHINOHARA AND ALrrHOPJZING THE PREPARATION OF A GIFT DE~D -Jimmie and Judi Shinohara have generously agreed to donate to the City of Chula Vista that portion of their property at 4705 Otay Valley Road which is, or will be, considered "unusable~ land Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (City Attorney) ' 8. RESOLLrrlON 15851 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH URBAN CO~ENCE CORPORATION FOR THE OPERATION OF THE BAYFRONT VISITOR INFORMATION CENTER - Staff has completed the RFP process and negotiated the proposed agreement with Urban Convenience Corporation. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Deputy City Manager Thomson) 9.A. RESOLUTION 15857. APPROVING FINAL MAP AND SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR CHULA VISTA TRACT 89-5, RANCHO DEL REY, SPA II, PHASE I, UNIT I - On 10/10/89, Council approved the Tentative Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 89-5 - Rancho del Rey SPA II. On that tentative map, phase and unit boundaries were delineated. The final maps for these six units are now before Council for approval. Staffrecommends approval of resolutions "A~ through 'G~. (Director of Public Works) Pulled from the Consent Calendar Tom Davis, 1657 Gotham Street, Chula Vista, California, spoke in opposition of the staff recommendation. He stated there were 540 units that would be approved by the resolutions presented to Council. He stated the problem of water was only addressed very briefly and questioned what guidelines Council used to monitor this type of a development regarding water consumption. John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated the Otay Water District had a water allocation program that provides that all developers in the region apply for permits. The Council is also looking at water threshold standards for new developments. Councilman Malcolm stated Council was looking at revising some of the thresholds and noted that if the water situation became critical, developers would not be able to obtain their permits. The City is working closely with both water districts regarding this issue. This project falls under the thresholds set by the City. MINUTES -4- September 18, 1990 Councilwoman McCandliss stated the threshold is changing and that through a task force formed last year, the Council is looking a refining the water threshold. It is hoped this will allow the Council to discuss this issue prior to approvals, as it stands now, this is up to the water districts. Councilman Nader noted there must be cert~ficauon from the water d~strict before issuing building permits, which is included in Condition #14. He did not feel the water threshold in the past was sufficient and he noted the Council is toughening it up. He questioned whether this plan was subject to the Growth Management Plan and if staff anticipated that the plan, or any revisions to the thresholds, would assure that further sacrifices would not be asked of the citizens due to this type of development. Robert Leiter, Director of Planning, responded that there was a condition on the tentative map that made both the tentative map and any permits subject to the Growth Management Element. The draft Growth Management Element includes interim policies that deal with a water conservation program in conjunction with a requirement of a SPA plan. Condition #14 of the Planning Department conditions require chat the tentative map and any permits be subject to the Growth Management element. Councilman Nader stated the project was well past the SPA plan and questioned whether the project would be subject to those standards. Mr. Leiter responded that it would not, as currently drafted. Staff could look at expanding the applicability of the policy if Council so directs. Councilman Malcolm stated the tentative map was approved over three years ago. He felt Mr. Davis' issue was valid but not on this project due to the time frame and commitment Council had previously made. He felt the issue was whether the City should consider a moratorium on building permits due to the water issue. This should be addressed in the possible revisions of the thresholds. Mayor Cox responded that the City was not a water serving agency and at this thne the City had to rely on the water districts regarding availability of water. If the district can guarantee the availability, the City, under the current thresholds, cannot deny the request due to water availability. Victor A. Nolan, 12 Via Barberini, Chula Vista, California, spoke in favor of the staff recommendation. He stated development could not be stopped, but as long as the water districts can guarantee the water supply he did not know how the Council could do anything different than they were. ILESOLLITIONS A TROUGH G OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, reading of the text was waived. Councilman Nader stated he was not comfortable voting for the resolutions due to the comments by staff regarding the revised growth management program. He did not feel a first come first serve basis served the needs of the City. Councilman Malcolm responded he would vote yes as the Council had made a commitment to the developer. The growth management program should have been completed and in place long ago. Councilman Nader stated it was his understanding that it was approved under the condition that the project would be subject to the growth management program. He was uncomfortable with the explanation given by staff. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-1~0 with Councilman Nader opposed. Councilman Moore questioned if there was any growth management criteria the project would not be forced to comply with. MINUTES -S- September 18, 1990 Mr. Letter responded that the project would have to comply with all the threshold standards. He felt the issue was with some specific implementation policies relating to water that would be applied to new projects at the SPA plan level. He stated this was a draft program and could be changed. Councilman Nader stated he was talking about the water portion of the growth management implementation program, not the thresholds. Staff had indicated that this project would be exempt from those portions as applied to the SPA plan of new projects. Mr. Letter responded that the project would not be exempt from any of the thresholds but would be exempt from specific draft implementation policies in the draft implementation program. B. RESOLLrFION 15853 APPROVING F1NAL MAP AND SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENT AGi~ ~MENT FOR CHULA VISTA TRACT 89-5, RANCHO DEL PEr, SPA I1, PHASE I, UNIT 2 C. RESOLUTION 15854 APPROVING FINAL MAP AND SUBDMSION IMPROVEMF2qTAGFtR~MENT FOR CHULA VIS'FA TRACT 89-5, RANCHO DEL REY, SPA II, PHASE I, UNIT 3 D. RESOLUTION 15855 APPROVING FINAL MAP AND SUBDMSI ON IMPROVEMENT AGREFaMFa, qT FOR CHULA VISTA TRACT 89-5, RANCHO DEL REY, SPA II, PHASE 2, UNIT 1 E. RESOLUTION 15856 APPROVING FINAL MAP AND SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENT AGR ~MENT FOR CHULA VISTA TRACT 89-5, RANCHO DEL REY, SPA It, PHASE 2, UNIT 2 F. RESOLUTION 158.57 APPROVING FINAL MAP AND SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENT AGR EI!MENT FOR CHULA VISTA TRACT 89-5, RANCHO DEL REY, SPA II, PHASE 2, UNIT 3 G. RESOLUTION 15858 APPROVING SUPPLFAVIENTAL SUBDMSION IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME 10. RESOLUTION 15859 APPROVING A HAZARD ELIMINATION SAFETY (H.E.S.) PROGRAM SUPPLEMFAqT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND CALTRANS FOR FEDERAL-MD FUNDING FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPRO~ AT FIVE LOCATIONS (PROJECT NUMBER ~ [359]) - Approval of the program supplement will add the City's approved Hazard Elimination Safety project ro a master agreement between the City and the State which governs the conduct of u'ansportation related Federal-Aid programs. Approval and execution of the program supplement is a federal requirement for the release of federal funds for the project. Staff recommends Council approve the resolution and authorize the Mayor to execute the Traffic Signal Hazard Elimination Safety Program supplement. (Director of Public Works) 11. REPORT DOCUMENTATION OF CLOSED SESSION AC,-i1VITY- On 6/13/90, the City Council requested that the City Attorney provide them with a report as to the pros and cons of taking minutes during City Council dosed sessions, as well as the pros and cons of releasing this information to the public, with a special request to consider audio taping as part of the alternatives. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (City Attorney) Councilmembers Malcolm and Nader voted no. 12. REPORT ENFORCEMFaNT POLICY CONCERNING SECTION 10.52.110 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE - THE PLACEMENT OF 'FOR SALE' SIGNS ON PARKED VEHICLES - Staff has reviewed the ordinance with the City Attorney's office and staff has concluded that it is enforceable and serves a very useful purpose. For uniformity in enforcement of this ordinance, a written policy has been distributed to MINUTES -6- September 18, 1990 all members of the Police Department. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (Chief of Police) Pulled from Consent Calendar Councilman Nader stated he supported the staff recommendations but wanted to get clarification of the memorandum to be dislrlbuted to the Police Department. He questioned whether the Department would cite in response to a complaint, a car on private property owned by the property owner. William Winters, Chief of Police, responded that they are advising their officers not to cite for a violation of this section if the car is on a public street, as the department has to show that it was the primary purpose which is difficult to do. If parked in front of someone's home or on a public street, the Department prefers to use the 72 hour section to handle those violations and that is the intent of the memorandum. MSUG CNader/Moore) to accept the staff recommendatiom 13. REPORT PROS AND CONS OF EXPANDING POLIGE EMERGFffqCY TOW RF22ERRAL LIST FROM FIVE TO SIX COMPANIES - At the 8/28/90 Council meeting, Council received a written communication from Mr. Casey Jones requesting that he be added to the police emergency tow referral list. Staff recommends Council not add any company to the two list at this time and review the issue again when the current conU'act expires in October of 1992. (Chief of Police) Pulled from Gonsent C-alend~r Ed Wood, 140 Center Street, Chula Vista, California, representing Glenview Towing, spoke in favor of the staff recommendations. If Council expanded the list and put on anyone that wanted to be on, it would create pandemonium. He felt the process currently utilized was equirable and should be followed. There are currently five companies on the list, each is on for six days, with the companies rotating. Towing assignments are currently once a month. He noted the towing companies also tow abandoned cars for the City at no charge which takes away from the gross revenues. He felt it would create a financial hardship on the existing companies. Duane Pudgil, 378 San Miguel Drive, Chula Vista, California, representing South Bay Towing, spoke in favor of the staff recommendations. He has been serving the City for twenty-one years and stated he was a local small businessman. They currently have a three year contract for towing and he would like to see the contract honored. Councilman Nader questioned whether the contracts contain conditions regarding exclusivity. City Attorney Boogaard responded that the contracts do not contain any verbiage regarding exclusivity. He was informed that during the negotiating process, there was a verbal commitment to the companies. William Winters, Chief of Police, responded that the only things represented to the towing companies was that the City would be doing business with the five companies. He was unaware of any other verbal agreements. Councilman Malcolm questioned what the opinion was regarding a commitment to only five tow companies. Chief Winters responded that staff had recommended that the number be reduced from five to three and it was Council's desire to retain the existing five companies. He felt the Council had made a commitment to the towing companies. Bo Lemler, 34867 Main Street, Chula Vista, California, representing Paxton Towing, spoke in favor of the staffrecommendation. He stated the City of Chula Vista had the lowest rates of all cities in the state. When Council requested new conditions, the companies agreed and purchased the equipment needed and hired personnel as needed. He stated the calls are down approximately 30% from two years ago and if another MINUTES -7- September 18, 1990 company is brought in, the companies would not be able to give the same service and response time. He did not feel it was fair to bring on another company at this time. Peggy Rolling, 316 K Street, Chula Vista, California, representing AI-nold's Towing spoke in favor of the staff recommendation. They have purchased two tow trucks in order to comply with Council's conditions. This was done in anticipation of being able to continue to tow for the City. She felt there would be a financial hardship ff another company was added. John Clark, 904 Redbud Road, Chula Vista, California, representing J. E. Towing Inc., spoke in favor of the staff recommendation. He felt it would be wrong to add another company to the list at this time. He noted the high cost of equipment and operations. He also requested that Council keep in mind the needs of the tow companies when rezoning areas of the city. Casey Jones Jr., 178 Minor Avenue, Chula Vista, California, representing Eagle Towing, spoke in opposition to the staff recommendation. He stated he had researched the number of cars towed within the City over the last year and felt the Council would be surprised at the large number. Dawn Herring, Principal Management Assistant for the Police Department, stated there were 3,698 tows in 1989 with 2,449 tows from January to August 1990, which is a 3% decrease from 1989. Mayor Cox stated there were six or seven companies on the waiting list and questioned whether these companies would be considered in 1992. City Manager Goss responded that those companies expressing interest would be included for review in 1992. Mayor Cox felt the system utilized worked very well. If Eagle Towing were to be added to the list, it could be expected that the same request would be received from the five other companies on the waiting list. He would recommend that Council accept the staff recommendation and ask staff to begin a process to evaluate the towing service in conjunction with 1992 and come back to Council nine to twelve months prior to the expiration of the contracts in October 1992 and lay out what their recommendations would be in regards to the continuation of towing services in the City along with alternatives. Options should be made available for the Council to consider. Councilwoman McCandliss stated Council had felt that the five companies could respond to the City's needs and the companies had complied with the conditions set by Council. She also felt it was an exclusive agreement and that Council had a responsibility to honor it. Councilman Malcolm replied that the testimony had made a difference in how he felt regarding the issue. He felt there could be changes, but he had not remembered requiring the five towing companies to purchase equipment, etc. He complimented Mr. Jones for working with the staff and Council regarding his request. He also felt that the City should have a minority set-aside program. He would vote yes for the staff recommendations because of the amount of money spent by the five contracted towing companies to meet Council's conditions. MSC (Malcolm/Moore) to accept staff recommendations and direct staff to bring back a report within the next twelve months on how the City will deal with the problem, how many towing companies are proper, and when the contract will go out to bid. A minority set-aside program (i.e. County of San Diego) is to be brought back to Council within the next ninety days for review. City Attorney Boogaard stated he had done extensive research on the set-aside programs and in the last ten years there were three major Supreme Court cases which limited the ability to permit set-aside programs MINUTES -8- September 18, 1990 on an ethnic based classification. He would like the opportunity to review the report with the Police DeparOnent and provide a legal analysis. Councilman Nader stated he would expect to see included in the report a program that assures opportunity to minority owned businesses and a basis for Council to determine the optimum number of towing companies for a city the size of Chula Vista. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANt~ None Scheduled O'I2-1ER BUSINESS 14. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None. 1S. ITEMS PUl.LED FROM THE CONSENT GALENDAR (Items pulled: Sc, 9, 12 and 13) The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. 16. CIT~ MANAGER'S REPORT(S) - None. 17. MAYOR'S REPORT(S) a. Ratification of appoinnments to Boards and Commissions: Safety Commission MSUC (Moore/Cox) to appoint Frank Chister to the Safety Cornmlasion. b. Establishment of a Blue Ribbon Committee for review of the City's Draft Housing Element Update (1991-1996) Mayor Cox stated the City was required by the State to update the Housing Element every five years. It was staffs desire to have a Blue Ribbon Committee review this update. The recommended appoinm~ents-are: Maggie Helton, Joe Casillas, Nan Meyers, Alfredo Ybarra, and as ex-officio, Jim Fleishner and Judy Johnson. They are to review past achievements, review currents needs and assessments, and recommend policies and procedures. There will be a short time frame of two to three months. The recommended representatives from the development community would be Steve Boyle with Ken Baumgarmer as alternate, Bill Hauff with Tim Kruer as alternate, and Bob Santos with Doug Boule as alternate. MS (Cox/Moore) to ratify the appointments to the Blue Ribbon Committee for review of the City's Draft Housing Element Update. Councihnan Nader questioned whether the maker of the motion would be agreeable to expand the number of memberships by one or two. MINUTES -9- September 18, 1990 Mayor Cox replied chat he would not object, but stated there was an extremely short time flame. He would encourage the alternates to attend the meetings also. VOTE Obi MOTIObi: approved unanimously. c. Letter to Board of Supervisors requesting the County to move forward on the original development planned for the South County Regional Center. Mayor Cox stated he would like to see the Board of Supervisors better utilize the South County Regional Center. The ultimate plan was to include additional facilities and he felt the County could better utilize the facility if they were to incorporate many of the services curr~ntiy being provided at ocher locations. MS (Cox/Moore) to direct staff to prepare a letter for the Mayor's signature to the County Board of Supervisors urging them to bring forward those plans, and revise if necessary, to better utilize their existing land holdings and consolidate the existing County services at the South County Regional Center. Councilman Nader questioned what Council would be asking the County to do chat they were not currently doing. Mayor Cox responded chat the County had property that was being under utilized at the South County Regional Center. The site off Third and I Street was purchased to build a number of public facilities. He felt the County should look at the plans and what their needs are and see if they shouldn't build a permanent facility to meet those needs. Councilman Malcolm noted that the County does not pay development fees or property tax and questioned why the City would encourage them to build a permanent facility. Mayor Cox replied he was concerned chat the County get the most for their money. He felt there could be a considerable cost savings to the County if a permanent facility was built. The original concept of the South County Regional Facility was to consolidate the County services, rather than have them spread throughout the City. Councilman Moore responded chat it would be appropriate to notify the County and let them know there were bonding capabilities available. Councilwoman McCandliss felt the City should find out what the County was planning regarding other facilities, but she was not willing to encourage them to do anything more than that. SUBSTITLFFE MOTION: (Cox/Moore) to refer the item to staff and ask them to evaluate what would be in the best interest of the City and the Redevelopment Agency to be built on the balance of the South Goianty Regional Center land. Approved 4-1-0 with Councilman Nader voting no. d. Letter to the Board of Supervisors requesting the County to allow the booking of inmates at the South County Regional Center. Mayor Cox stated that the County could now charge booking fees, which could be upwards of $300,000 for the City of Chula Vista. He felt that if the Board of Supervisors should commit to allow inmates to be booked at the South County facility in Chula Vista, rather than transporting to downtown San Diego. MS (Cox/Moore) to draft a letter to the Board of Supervisors, question whether they intend to implement booking fees, and ff so, that they allow chose arrested in Chula Vista to be booked at the South County facility in Chula Vista. MINUTES -10- September 18, 1990 Councilman Malcolm responded that each jail in the County should be allowed to take bookings. He also questioned the possible increase in capacity of the facility. Councilwoman McCandliss agreed with Councilman Malcolm and questioned what the impact would be upon the facility. MS (Cox/Moore) to refer to staff with a report back to Council in two week~. Councilman Nader felt there were several other implications to be considered. He questioned how many people would be released in downtown Chula Vista after being booked and released. Council had requested, and the County had agreed to comply with not housing violent felons at the South County facility. He would like to see a booking policy where those not be housed here, would not be booked here. He would also like to know what impact there would be on the jail population once Proposition A is implemented. He hoped that the maker and seconder of the motion would agree to allowing staff additional time if needed to compile the report. Councilman Malcolm questioned whether the City could do their own bookings rather than being charged by the County. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. e. The California Energy Commission will be holding a public hearing on an application by SDG&E to construct a power plant in Chula Vista. The hearing is scheduled for Monday, September 24th at 7:00 p.m. at the California State Building, San Diego. Councilman Malcolm stated that the Coastal Commission had unanimously opposed the proposal for the power plant in Chula Vista due to tankering and environmental concerns. He noted the numerous projects in Chula Vista that were halted by the intervention of the Sierra Club and stated that they have not come out in opposition to the building of the power plant in Chula Vista. f. The San Diego Unified Port District is considering a process in which to put out a proposal for the development of the south end of Chula Vista Harbor. They voted to put out an RFP for an additional restaurant site and a hotel/motel. 18. COUNCIL COMMENTS a. Councilman Malcolm: Stated he had meet with several of the members of the Church Task Force and several developers and he felt staffhad not been given sufficient direction. He was informed that staff was not going to have a recommendation on the proper amount of acreage. Because of this, he felt the report was flawed and he would like to see an ordinance, on next week's agenda, setting up the proper zoning and then have staff and other commissions review it for input regarding what kind of land would be needed for all non-profit users. Councilwoman McCandliss felt the referral back to staffhad included meeting with the land owners in order to obtain their input regarding the acreage needed. II. Legislative Analysis Requiring Council Action - Not Addressed by Legislative Program MINUTES -11- September 18, 1990 HR 5188 (Bares) - Prohibits the spraying of toxic pesticides (malathion) over areas which have a population density greater than 1,000 persons per square mile. Staff recommends Council SUPPORT. Councilman Malcolm informed Council that the Legmlauve Conmuttee had pulled this item from the agenda. b. Counci man Nader: I. Discussion of all aspects of setting sewer rates including, but not limited to, the granting of a discount to senior citizens, handicapped, and/or low income residents. M CNader) to have staff restructure the sewer rate increase to adjust the low income rate increase not to exceed the Social Security COLA's and make appropriate adjusl~nents in the regular rate to make the entire package come out with the failed for lack of second, same amount of revenue as the increase that was passed this summer. Motion Councilwoman McCandliss responded that there were public hearings on this issue, and it had already gone into effect. She was not against giving consideration for the groups mentioned but did not feel she could do so under Council Comments without more information being presented. MS (Nadcr/McGandliss) to direct staffto bring back to Council for consideralSon a rate adjusl~nent on the last rate increase which would change the low income rate increase so as to not exceed the Socia/Security COLA, adjust the regular rate to offset that in terms of overall revenue, and tell Council what such a rate adjusl~nent would mean in terms of what the new rates would be under that scheme. Councilman Malcolm questioned whether there was currently a low income rate available. City Manager Goss responded that the rate increase was applied at the same percentage to the low income rates as the regular rates. .John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated there were approximately 200 people that applied for the low income rates. Councilman Moore questioned whether Councilman Nader was aware that the low income rate was 30% lower than the regular rates. Councilman Nader responded that he was aware of the 30% but expressed concern over setting a precedent on setting blanket overall raises. VOTE ON MOTION: failed 2-3-0 with Gouncilmembe~ Moore, Malcolm, and Mayor Cox voting no. _ II. Councilman Nader requested the "Bates Bill", regarding wastewater treatment be placed under his comments on next week's agenda. III. Councilman Nader questioned the status of the proposed graffiti contcol program involving young artists within the community. City Manager Goss responded that as part of the block grant funding, $15,000 was set aside. He was unaware of where the program currently stood and recommended that staff come back to Council with an information report to update the status. Councilman Nader requested a verbal report from staff within the next few weeks. MINUTES -12- September 18, 1990 c. Councilwoman McCandliss: RESOLUTION 15860 CITY ATTORNEY'S COMPENSATION FOR FY 1990-91 RESOLUTION 15860 OI"FvSR_ED BY COUNCILWOMAN MCGANDLISS, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. d. Councilman Moore: Councilman Moore stated there was concern by many as to whether the direction being taken regarding the Clean Water Act and Metro II was the right way to go. At this time, no one has taken the lead and said it was wrong. He felt this was primarily due to the benefits derived from lines, reclaimed water plants, etc. As of this time, with the laws and lawsuit there were no alternatives. Councilwoman McCandliss stated she had a fear that Council would be presented with a final product. She did not want to be put into a position of having to make a decision after only one or two meetings as to what would be best. ADJOURNMENT The meeting recessed at 8:45 p.m. and adjourned at 8:55 p.m. to a Redevelopment Agency meeting to discuss: MINLrrEs OF AN ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHUI~ VISTA, CALIFORNIA - 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Members Malcolm, McCandliss, Moore, Nader, and Chairman Cox ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, Director; Bruce M. Boogaard, Agency Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. REPORT PROPOSAL FOR DEVELOPMFJqT OF FORMER WINDMILL SITE - Continued from 9/11/90 meeting. Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, stated staff felt this was an extremely succefisful project. The three proposals received were felt to be admirable and that all three of the firms were anxious to build. It was a difficult process because it was an open process which presented a challenge to the Agency. All three proposals can be developed with or without the Kentucky Fried Chicken sire. The internal staff report, which narrowed the proposals from five to three, listed Pacific Scene as the most qualified. There has also been confusion regarding the tenancy, with ail three listing Mercy Hospital as a likely candidate. A hospital spokesman stared Flagship was given as the preferred choice, they had not reached a decision regarding Pacific Scene, and they had problems with Pieri due to their criteria. They also stated they would work with any of the three firms. Pamela Buchan, Senior Community Development Specialist, gave an overqiew of the three proposed projects. Mr. Salomone stated staffrecommended the Pieri project and the recommendation was based on a departure of what standard development in the Town Centre Project area. Ir is based primarily on the number of MINUTES -13- September 18, 1990 employees that would be generated by the professional building (estimated at 595) along with the fact that the building would make a statement in the downtown area. The Project Area Committee recommendation was also for the Pied project. Member McGandliss noted the disadvantages listed with the Pieri project and felt these were significant and questioned why these were not addressed. Mr. Salomone replied that there was no answer for the infrastructure problems at this time. It was felt there would be traffic problems with all three projects. The concern with the Pieri project is the five stories. Staff was also concemed about the interfacing with the residential area to the east, but felt the economic development benefits had more weight than those concerns. Member McCandliss stated she had reviewed the tapes of the previous meetings. She did not feel the projects had been analyzed as to what the district needed. Her concern of the intensity of the Peiri project was the mixture of commercial with medical and did not feel it was a benefit to the disu-ict. The other two proposals were similar to Park Plaza and questioned whether they would generate anything original to the area. Mr. Salomone replied that staff realized it would be taking a risk but felt it would compliment developments on future sites. Member Malcolm felt Mr. Pieri had done many projects in the City to be proud of, but the problem was that the Redevelopment Agency owned the property, and the Agency wanted to bend the rules. He did not feel the proposal lived up to the rules and was totally out of character of what Council wanted for downtown. He acknowledged Mr. Pieri's team as being all Chula Vista people. He understood that the Mercy people had stated the Pieri project was totally unacceptable to them. Mr. Salomone replied that in his conversations with Mercy Hospital, they had expressed a desire m be a stand alone tenant and that the Flagship proposal met their criteria. They also felt the Pacific Scene proposal would more than likely meet the criteria. They did not rule out the Pieri proposal, but at this time it did not meet the criteria. The design manual does allow for up to 100 feet of building height and criteria for additional landscaping and other things to compensate for that. Member Malcolm stated he did not feel the undergrounding of parking as a "con" for a project. He also felt Flagship and Pacific Scene had superior proposals due to the inclusion of a tenant. He did not feel there was a guarantee of a full building, tenants, jobs, etc. with the Pieri proposal. He felt the Pieri proposal was to intense and that the Agency should decide whether to go with Pacific Scene or Flagship. He felt there were good aspects to both proposals and felt the Agency should start the process of elimination and the first one deleted should be the Pieri Group. Chairman Cox replied that there were three excellent proposals to choose from. In evaluating these, each one had slzong points. He did not feel it should be held against the Pieri proposal because it did not meet the Town Centre Project Area manual. Pacific Scene had an excellent record with prior projects, Flagship is comparatively new, and the Pieri Group also had an established track record. He felt the Agency needed to be concerned about bringing in people that would work, live, and spend money in the downtown area. He was not sure that Mercy would be that critical to any of the projects and agreed with Member McCandliss' comments. He felt there would be a need for quality downtown office space and the best interests of the Redevelopment Agency would lean toward the Pieri proposal. The long terms benefits would be the estimated annual revenue, more retail in the proposal, more opportunity for professional office space, and the number of employees to be brought forward. Member Moore questioned what in the proposals were in violation of the General Plan versus the Town Centre Plan. MINUTES -14- September 18, 1990 Mr. Salomone replied the only problem staff had was with the Pieri proposal because two of the parcels were residential and might require an amendment, although the language in the design manual could be construed to allow the project. He did feel the proposal was in conformance with the General Plan. All three of the projects could cause ingress and egress problems at Alvarado. Member Nader felt if the Agency was trying to balance the desire for bulk and revenue with the desire to enhance the downtown center area, the Pacific Scene proposal made good sense. He felt all three were good proposals. The underground parking was a plus and the proposal was the most consistent with what was desired for the downtown area. Member McCandliss felt each proposal was well presented but there was not one single proposal that stood out. She felt the Pieri proposal was to big and did not feel it was the most appropriate use for downtown. The Flagship and Pacific Scene proposals looked like the mixed use that had not accomplished what the Agency wanted on Third Avenue. Member Malcolm stated he would not vote for any of the proposals unless there was sufficient parking. He felt the Agency should have staff go back and analyze Flagship and Pacific Scene and come back with recommendations of what they felt were the pro's and con's. MS {Malcolrn/Nader) to refer to staff to analyze Flagship and Pacific Scene and bring back recomrr endafions regarding the pro's and con's of each proposal at the next Agency meeting. Member Nader questioned what the second recommendation of staff would be. Mr. Salomone felt that staff would need fiarther time to review both proposals before making a second recommendation as they felt both proposals were very similar. Member Moore felt redevelopment was very different than any other part of the City due to the subsidy. Because of this, redevelopment allowed the Agency flexibility, but not the authority to violate the thresholds. He did not feel the Agency's hands were tied as long as the thresholds were not violated. He felt all the proposals were good and that no proposal should be eliminated. Member McCandliss questioned whether it would be inappropriate to the selection process ff Pieri was asked to resubmit a scaled down proposal. Agency Attorney Boogaard replied that he was not familiar with the set of expectations set forth at the time the proposals were submitted. Mr. Salomone responded that it was a very opened ended RFP with no commitments made on behalf of the Agency. He felt it would be more appropriate to allow all three to resubmit proposals based upon the Agency's comments tonight. Member Malcolm stated he did have a problem with that as he felt it would set a precedent. He felt the Agency should enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement with one firm in order to keep integrity in the system. Member McCandliss stated there were no guidelines set for evaluation and she did not see how giving the opportunity to resubmit would interfere with the integrity of the process. Member Malcolm felt there were two proposals that tried to follow the rules (interfacing with the residential zoning) while one proposed a parking garage. If the Agency was concerned about the tenants, an exclusive negotiating agreement should be entered into. All rules and regulations should be followed and met. The MINUTES -1S- September 18, 1990 reason for sending it back to staff, would be to get input with a recommendation back as to which proposal (Flagship or Pacific Scene) was the best. Member Nader stated that if the motion is approved, he hoped staff would take into consideration the comments tonight, especially regarding the underground parking facility. Mr. Salomone requested that staff be allowed two weeks. C~hairman Cox stated he would not vote for the motion. He noted the recommendation of the Pieri proposal by the Town Centre Project Area Committee and the staff recommendation. He felt the Pieti proposal would be in the best interest of downtown redevelopment. VOTE ON MOTION: Motion approved 3-2-0, Chairman Cox and Member Moore voting no. Member Moore replied that he voted no because he did not feel the Pieri proposal should have been deleted from review but he would go along with the process. Member Nader did not feel the Agency was eliminating one proposal, but asking staff for a comparison between the other two. He did not feel there would be anything that would prevent the Agency from voting for the Pieri proposal if so decided. Member McCandliss felt it was important to let the developers know whether they were being eliminated at this time. Mr. Pieri informed Council that he was withdrawing their proposal. He stated he totally disagreed with Member Malcolm and did not feel his interest was directed properly. He felt he had a track record that had proven itself and wished Pacific Scene and Flagship good luck with their proposals. 4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None. 5. DIRECTOR'S REPORT - None. 6. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT - None. 7. MEMBER'S C0MMF2NUPS- None. The City Council/Redevelopment Agency meet in a closed session 10:10 p.m. to discuss: Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Escobedo versus City of Chula Vista Potential acquisition of property pursuant to Government Code Section S4956.8 - 798 'F" Street (Rados Brothers, owners); and Parcels in the general vicinity of Main Street and 4th Avenue, being 629-03-04, 629-03-05,629-04-09, 629-04-10, 629-04-12, 629-04-16, 629-04-17, 629-04-18, 629-04- 23, 629-04-24, 629-05-05, and 620-061-01 (Nelson/Sloan Corporation or Nelson/Sloan Materials, owIlers) MINUTES -16- September 18, 1990 ADJOURNMENT AT 11:00 P.M. to the Regular City Council Meeting on September 25, 1990 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, ~BEVEI~Y A. ALrrHELET, CIVIC, City Clerk Vieki C. Soderquist, Deputy City-.Clerk