Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCVRC Min 2006/05/25 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (CVRC) May 25, 2006 6:00 P.M. A Regular Meeting of the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 6:10 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Directors: Castaneda, Chavez, Desrochers, Lewis, Rindone, Rooney, McCann, and Chairman Padilla ABSENT: Directors: Paul ALSO PRESENT: Chief Executive Officer Rowlands, Assistant General Counsel Hull, and Secretary Smith PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, MOMENT OF SILENCE CONSENT CALENDAR (Item 1) Director Rindone requested and received concurrence to trail Item I until after Public Comments. 1. This item was trailed until after Public Comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS Pamela Bensoussan, provided a brief verbal and written history of the Vogue theatre on Third A venue and suggested consideration be given for the purchase of this historic resource, and potential use as a cultural arts center. Director Castaneda stated that a strategic plan and draft policy were put together to deal with historic preservation, but it has gone nowhere. Properties are now being acquired and the potential is there for historic resources to be destroyed without a means to protect them. Chairman Padilla noted that language was provided in the General Plan as well as part of the Specific Plan regarding historical preservation. Director Desrochers stated he had requested staff investigate the status of the Vogue Theatre sale at the last CVRC meeting. Redevelopment Manager Crockett stated that staff had met with the individual who has the property in escrow and outlined their concerns and the historic nature of the building. Further, they have directed him to look into hiring a historic architect to understand the limitations and value of this historic building for reuse. He has 90 days to determine if he wants to purchase the property and staff will be meeting with him again in 2-3 weeks. Consent Calendar Item I was heard at this time. CONSENT CALENDAR (Item I) Chairman Padilla stated he would be abstaining trom voting on the minutes, as he was not present at the meeting. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May II, 2006 ACTION: Vice Chairman McCann offered Consent Calendar Item 1. Director Desrochers seconded the motion, and it carried 7-0-1, with Chairman Padilla abstaining and Director Paul absent. ACTION ITEMS Director Castaneda recused himself trom participation on Item 2, as he owns property near one of the project areas. He then left the Council Chambers. Vice Chairman McCann left the Council Chambers. 2. CONSIDERATION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FIVE YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (2005-2009) FOR THE MERGED BAYFRONTITOWN CENTRE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (INCLUDING BA YFRONT AND TOWN CENTRE I) AND THE MERGED CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (INCLUDING TOWN CENTRE II, SOUTHWEST, OTA Y VALLEY AND ADDED AREA) The Five Year Implementation Plan has been prepared in accordance with the statutory requirements of redevelopment law and is a strategic planning document for the Redevelopment Agency, which outlines key steps to successful redevelopment of western Chula Vista for the next five years. Redevelopment Manager Crockett introduced the staff report, noting that the plan represents a fundamental change in the philosophy of the Agency and how the Agency conducts business. In the past, the projects have been scattered, resulting in an inability to create momentum to incentivize private capital to invest in the City. The plan changes also ensure that the plan aligns with the Council's strategic themes and the Community Development Department's Strategic Plan, and serves as an implementing tool. The document is educational and user-friendly, and provides a work program for accountability of successes and failures, prioritizes resources, and puts in writing, how the Agency has changed its way of doing business. Principal Community Development Specialist Lee highlighted key elements of the plan, guiding principles, geographic focus areas, strategic objectives, and the redevelopment work program, which can be used to measure the annual successes. Director Rindone inquired as to where the proposed June 28, 2006 public participation workshop would be held. Mr. Lee responded that staff has confirmed the location of the Charter School on Broadway for that particular workshop. Assistant General Counsel Hull noted for the record that Vice Chairman McCann had left the Council Chambers at the start of this item, as he owns property within 500 feet of one of the project areas. Page 2 - CVRC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov May 25, 2006 --.--. ----. ._______~-----....J ACTION ITEMS (continued) Director Chavez inquired and confirmed tl;t~t, ,~t~ff >>'9uld be notifying the various community groups identified as key stakeholders as well as neighborhoods that are forming groups. Director Rindone suggested that one option to encourage public participation would be to hold a public hearing by the CVRC out in various community locations, and requested that when staff comes back with their public participation report, this topic be contained in the menu of options for consideration. Director Chavez suggested that the CVRC process be meshed with the citywide process to avoid potential for disconnection. Director Desrochers requested progress be measured with the annual budget. Chairman Padilla stated that he supported the resolution making the formal recommendation, but felt the document provides only a loose rramework, and is lacking in detail about how to get to actual implementation and decisions about needed processes and policies. Director Rindone concurred with Chairman Padilla, stating that he suspected that not having a CEO for the Redevelopment Corporation and separate staff was the cause. He reintroduced his previous referral that progress needs to be made in that avenue. Assistant General Counsel Hull stated for the record, that Director Rindone does not own property within 500 feet of the redevelopment area, and therefore can participate on this item. Laura Hunter, representing the Environmental Health Coalition, requested that the CVRC consider additional work program elements for the Bayfront, including, on page 34 under the Goodrich section, the cleanup of contamination rrom the Goodrich site onto the south campus site, and that the area west of their north campus site needs to be addressed proactively. Transportation issues related to the Bayftont need to be tracked as milestones, and in terms of housing, how to raise the percentage of the tax increment that is set aside for affordable housing. Chairman Padilla stated he was looking forward to the day when there could be a duly noticed meeting of both the Corporation Board and Redevelopment Agency, where more public comments could be taken, amendments could be made, and separate procedural votes could be taken as the Corporation Board and the Agency Board, resulting in the adoption of whatever is needed at the same meeting after taking input rrom out in the community. ACTION: Chairman Padilla offered the resolution, heading read, text waived: CVRC RESOLUTION NO. 2006-023, RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION MAKING RECOMMENDATION TO THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO ADOPT A FIVE YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE 2005-2009 FIVE YEAR PERIOD FOR THE MERGED SA YFRONT/TOWN CENTRE I REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (INCLUDING BA YFRONT AND TOWN CENTRE I) AND THE MERGED CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (INCLUDING TOWN CENTRE II, SOUTHWEST, OTAY V ALLEY, AND ADDED AREA) The motion carried 6-0-2, with Directors Castaneda and McCann abstaining, and Director Paul absent. Page 3 - CVRC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov May 25, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) Assistant General Counsel Hull stated that Directors Castaneda and McCann would be abstaining from participation on Item 3 due to the location of their respective properties, and that Councilmember Rindone would be participating. 3. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDING REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR (I) THE MERGED BA YFRONT/TOWN CENTRE I REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (ONLY PERTAINING TO BAYFRONT ORIGINAL AND TOWN CENTRE I); AND (2) THE MERGED CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (ONLY PERTAINING TO TOWN CENTRE II ORIGINAL AND OTAY VALLEY) PURSUANT TO SENATE BILL 1096 AS CODIFIED IN HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33333.6 The Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation is a recommending body to the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency on legislative actions involving redevelopment funds, plans and regulations. The Redevelopment Agency is required to make payment to a special state account - the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund. In exchange, the State Legislature authorized agencies to extend the effectiveness of their redevelopment plans by up to two years, provided the agency can make certain findings. Redevelopment Manager Crockett provided the staff report. ACTION: Director Lewis offered the resolutions, headings read, texts waived: a. CVRC RESOLUTION NO. 2006-024, RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION MAKING RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING REDEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE MERGED BA YFRONT/TOWN CENTRE I REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (ONLY PERTAINING TO BAYFRONT ORIGINAL AND TOWN CENTRE I) PURSUANT TO SENATE BILL 1096 AS CODIFIED IN HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33333.6 b. CVRC RESOLUTION NO. 2006-025, RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION MAKING RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE MERGED CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA (ONLY PERTAINING TO TOWN CENTRE II ORIGINAL AND OTAY VALLEY) PURSUANT TO SENATE BILL 1096 AS CODIFIED IN HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33333.6 The motion carried 6-0-2 with Directors Castaneda and McCann abstaining, and Director Paul absent. Chairman Padilla stated that staff has requested Item 4 be pulled until further notice. Page 4 - CVRC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov May 25, 2006 -~- ---' ACTION ITEMS (continued) 4. CONSIDERATION OF ISSUAl',TCJ;\.~D. ...SALE BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS, IN TWO OR MORE SERIES, IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $28.5 MILLION IN CONNECTION WITH THE BA YFRONT/TOWN CENTRE I REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT The Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation is a recommending body to the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency on financial matters involving redevelopment funds. The refunding of the 1994 Senior Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds, Series A and D, and the 1994 Subordinate Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds, Series C, based on current projections, would provide an annual debt service savings to the Redevelopment Agency of $500,000, or a total savings of $4.8 million over the remaining 20 years of the bonds (20% of the par amount of the bonds). Staff Recommendation: That the CVRC adopt the following resolutions: a. RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RECOMMENDING THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF TAX ALLOCATION REFUNDING BONDS IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT-TO-EXCEED $28,500,000 IN CONNECTION WITH THE BA YFRONT/TOWN CENTRE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, AND APPROVE RELATED DOCUMENTS b. RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (I) APPROVE ENTERING INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH EJ. DE LA ROSA & CO. AS UNDERWRITERS FOR THE REFUNDING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1994 SENIOR TAX ALLOCATION BONDS, SERIES C AND D; AND (2) APPROVE ENTERING INTO THE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH HARRELL & COMPANY ADVISORS, LLC TO SERVE AS FINANCIAL ADVISORS FOR THIS BOND ISSUANCE AND ASSOCIATED REFUNDINGS IN A FORM ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ACTION: Motion by Director Desrochers, to continue Item 4 until renoticed. Director Rindone seconded the motion, and it carried 6-0-2, with Directors Castaneda and McCann abstaining, and Director Paul absent. Director Desrochers expressed concern with delaying action on the bonds, and rising interest costs. Assistant General Counsel Hull stated that the sale date would not be affected. Directors Castaneda and McCann returned to the Council Chambers. Page 5 - CVRC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov May 25, 2006 PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION (DRC-05-50) AND OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT FOR EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR TENANT IMPROVEMENTS TO MODIFY AN EXISTING STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 320 THIRD AVENUE FOR THE OPERATION OF A NEW FITNESS HEALTH CLUB Exterior and interior tenant modifications to an existing structure located at 320 Third Avenue for the purpose of opening a 24 Hour Fitness Center. The structure was previously occupied by the CinemaStar Theater and has been vacant for over five years. Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Chairman Padilla opened the public hearing and recognized Planning Manager Ladiana, who provided the staff report. Chairman Padilla expressed his frustration that a community outreach and education program was not in place, and stated that one was needed in the interim for projects prior to recommendations being brought before the CVRC. Director Rooney stated that he had concerns with the removal of mature trees from the plaza, and the type of materials being used to build the proposed trellis, noting that the material used needs to be low maintenance, as do the plant materials. He then inquired as to what would be done with the street furniture at night stating he did not wish to see it chained down to the pavement. Director Rooney then inquired as to what retail uses were proposed to front on the sidewalk, whether the stucco was being replaced on the entire fa9ade, and if the proposed planter was attached to the building. Ms. Ladiana responded that the retail uses had not been determined as of yet, that all stucco was being replaced, and that the planter shown was raised and set away from the building, the final design details would be part of the permit process. Director Lewis expressed concerns with delaying approval, however, supported Chairman Padilla's comments on wanting to see more public review, which necessitates delaying approval. He then inquired and confirmed that the existing city-owned parking structure would be used for the site which raised the question as to whether a fitness center was the highest and best use for agency participation when looking at return on investment in terms of tax increment. Vice Chairman McCann expressed frustration with the lack of a public input process, and requested the item be tabled, stating he could not support it currently. He then suggested the workshop scheduled for June 28tJi on community involvement be moved up. Further, he questioned whether the proposed use, is the highest and best use for the property. Director McCann then requested consideration of the June 8, 2006 meeting being used to put together something for the public input mechanism. Chairman Padilla turned the meeting over to Vice Chairman McCann and left the dais at 7:26 p.m. Director Rindone requested the budget workshop scheduled for June 8th at 5:00 p.m. be moved up to 4:00 p.m., followed by a public workshop on community involvement to be held at a time specific of7:00 p.m. Page 6 - CVRC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov May 25, 2006 --,_._~---------~---_., PUBLIC HEARING (continued) Director Chavez echoed her colleagues concerns. and expressed an interest in hearing from the community members who were present. Director Castaneda stated that a full fitness center would be a good use in the downtown area and that the CVRC, community, and staff architects needed to work together to determine what the downtown Chula Vista design style should be, adding that his understanding was that the CVRC was intended to plan things on the front end rather than just vote on things at the back end. Georgie Stillman, representing the North West Civic Association, expressed appreciation for the CVRC members comments, adding that the location under discussion was in the heart of old Chula Vista, and that its use for a gym was inappropriate. Pamela Bensoussan, representing the North West Civic Association, and their Urban Core Specific Plan Project Review Committee, suggested the CVRC delay granting of this design review permit. She then recommended the CVRC members review the May 18 and 24, 2005 staff reports, and re-visit the data already presented on public participation, and choose one of the options put on the table. Further, she requested that the City Councilor Redevelopment Agency form a Redevelopment Community Advisory Committee at the next possible opportunity. Ken Wright, resident and member of the North West Civic Association on the Urban Core Specific Plan Project Review Committee, stated that his community group was available to assist with community outreach to obtain public comment. Robert Vacchi, with Wertz McDade Wallace Moot & Brower, representing A VG Partners, the property owners, stated they were more than willing to participate in the public input process. He stated that the current property owner purchased the property in 2002, and it has been vacant ever since, noting that the proposed project has been in the system for more than a year now, and is permitted in the current zone. Nina Raey, of Fancher Development Services, representing 24-Hour Fitness Center, stated that this meeting was the first time she had heard that this application should have been taken out to the neighborhood community for input. Director Castaneda stated that this application might just be a tenant improvement with the underlying zone allowing it to be there, which limits the Board's ability to say whether it can or can't be, but community input and support is still needed. Director Rindone suggested staff add any other projects that may be in the works, to the meeting proposed for June 8, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., to get public input and participation. Lupita Jimenez, Vice President of Crossroads II Corporation, expressed concerns with the placement in the middle of downtown Third Avenue; that the Third Avenue Village Association (T A V A) has not reviewed the project, and that the public has not had an opportunity to provide input. She then requested that the CVRC postpone action on this project until the public outreach process has been approved and the Third Avenue Village Association has had a chance to review it. Page 7 - CVRC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov May 25, 2006 PUBLIC HEARING (continued) Teresa Acerro, member of the Project Review Committee of the Northwest Civic Association, expressed concerns that doing things project, by project or building by building, would miss the whole point of the entire Urban Core Specific Plan to have something coordinated and have an overall ambience and continuity. She urged the CVRC to wait for public comment prior to approval. Liza Moctezuma, Chairperson of the Town Center PAC and President of T A V A, thanked everyone for recognizing the need for public participation and inquired as to why only the audience members had mentioned T A V A and the TCP AC when both bodies had been functioning for years, particularly with regards to the Third Avenue Village core. Ms. Moctezuma encouraged the CVRC look to at the bodies that are there to give input and also encouraged the applicants to take their project before the Northwest Civic Association, Crossroads II, the Chamber of Commerce, the Town Center PAC, and the Design Committee and Board of Directors of the Third Avenue Village Association. Being no further members of the public wishing to speak, Chairman Padilla closed the public hearing. Director Lewis reiterated that one of the reasons the CVRC was established was to not discourage investment as well as obtain public participation. Projects needed to be moved on quickly and thoroughly. Director Desrochers echoed Director Lewis' comments that the interested groups review needs to be balanced with the investors needs, and expressed concerns that the review meetings need to be consolidated. Director Castaneda requested the project application be referred to the Town Center PAC and Design Review Committee of T A V A, and that they consolidate and provide a public meeting. Director Chavez inquired as to why projects need to be sent in all directions and could not just be incorporated into the Tuesday Council meeting agendas. Director Lewis added that the Bayfront Citizen Advisory Committee process utilized elements from throughout the City and that might be a way to structure this process. Director McCann stated that when originally looking at forming the CVRC, the Citizen Advisory Committee was considered to be the vehicle and could still be used to streamline the process. Director Rindone stated the need for the CVRC board to reassess, and bifurcate the difference between tenant improvements and redevelopment projects. Tbe Bayfront and Citizen Advisory Committee process was different than a tenant improvement process. Both require community input, but they are different processes. The vision for the Third Avenue Village core is more encompassing and equally critical, but you can't apply the same depth for tenant improvements that would delay or discourage an applicant. Positive improvements should be encouraged. ACTION: Chairman Padilla moved that the Corporation Board continue the item and requested that the applicant and staff collaborate in an effort to make contact with the existing PAC and the T A V A Design Committee, conduct a meeting with the community and solicit community input. Director McCann seconded the motion. Page 8 - CVRC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov May 25, 2006 _.._-- - ~ -~--_._-- ~- - _._---.~------ -~ .~ ACTION ITEMS (continued) Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Smith apologized to the Board and the public for the misstep, stating that staff remains committed to taking the Redevelopment Corporation through a very public process. Staff is caught in a Board trying to get their feet up and moving on projects faster than there is process in place. Absent that process, staff took the tact of using the existing City process of following the regulations and process of the existing Design Review Committee, which is to bring the design review before the Corporation in a public setting for people to comment and act upon. Director Rindone expressed support of the Chairman's motion and requested clarification of the intent to have time specific input on June 8th at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Padilla stated he was not opposed to that and inquired as to whether a budget hearing was also scheduled for that evening. City Manager Rowlands stated that if the Council would agree to start the budget hearing at 4:00 p.m., there would be time to hold the CYRC meeting at 7:00 p.m., and assured the Board that staff fully felt the frustrations of the public and the Board. Numerous documents have been prepared by staff in the last I Y2 years on the topic of public involvement, and the input has been clear. Staff preparation has been done on this topic and they are prepared to bring the first part of the public improvement process to the meeting of June 8th in order to expedite the formalization of public involvement. Chairman Padilla stated that the sooner the meeting was held, the better. Funds did not need to be spent on a consultant. A decision on a process needed to be made. Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Smith stated that the meeting on June 28th with the facilitator was intended to model the roles and responsibilities of the CYRC and how the review of projects will work. Staff is prepared to start the discussion, bring back some of the original work, talk about the roles, responsibilities, and comglex abilities of the projects, but would still like to have public participation workshop on the 28 to help the Corporation get input from the public on the different ideas that will be laid out. Chairman Padilla stated that many long discussions had resulted in the creation of the Bylaws and explained to the public that the process would be streamlined and consolidated into the CYRC body. The decision to create the CYRC has been made; now the process of how to get things in front of the CYRC needs to be finalized. Director Castaneda agreed with Chairman Padilla. Director Desrochers expressed concern that the timeframe to get the project out to the Town Center PAC and T A Y A, and for them to get agendas out and get the public involved and have them reach a consensus seemed too short to meet the June 8th meeting date. Chairman Padilla stated that getting a representative from each group and having them get together might be what is needed without over complicating things. City Manager Rowlands concurred with the CYRC Board, and stated that the topic of public involvement and how it can be structured and moved on faster, recommendations and options could be before the Board on the 8th. Page 9 - CYRC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov May 25, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) Director Chavez noted that staff has a list of organizations in place and suggested that each organization be requested to send a representative to the June 8, 2006 meeting. Director Lewis stated he understood there were two issues. One is the issue having to do with a policy for public participation. The second is the application before the Board presently, which needs to go first and the forum is needed as soon as possible. Director Rindone stated there was a motion on the floor with a second. Both would be accomplished on the 8th and if not another meeting would be scheduled. lfthe budget is not done with by 7:00 p.m., it is recessed and these issues are addressed following the workshop at 4:00 p.m. Chairman Padilla stated that, as the maker of the motion, he wanted to clarify his intent. He was not making a motion to have the workshop discussing the policy and public input on the 8th. His motion was to direct staff to go back with the applicant and make contact with the appropriate community groups before bringing it back to the Corporation. The motion with regard to the resolution and the application was to continue this item with the direction to staff to request the collaboration of the applicant, they would contact T A VA's design review representative, PAC representative and conduct public outreach before bringing it back to the CVRC at the appropriate time. Chairman Padilla then inquired and received confirmation that Vice Chairman McCarm, the second on the motion, concurred with his clarification of the motion. Vice Chairman McCarm stated that the original intent of the CVRC was to have a citizens advisory committee with different representatives from different community organizations to all come together to do the process of design review. There is enough time to bring those groups together, get their comments and make a decision on the 8th. Chairman Padilla stated that he was not, in his motion, requiring that the decision on public process and policy be made on June 8th, and expressed doubt that the applicant would be able to gain public input by then, but if an update was available on the 8th for the Agency members, as they would be sitting as the Council at the Budget meeting, that would be acceptable, but would still need to be noticed for a future CVRC meeting. The date of June 28th is already established for a public hearing on the policy process, and should stand. Vice Chairman McCarm stated this was acceptable to him as the second on the motion. Director Rindone stated that he understood the City Manager to say that staff would have some information to provide on the evening of June 8th for a preliminary discussion. Chairman Padilla stated that the 8th is a noticed meeting of the Council for budget purposes, not the CVRC. The staff update on recommendations and policies, would require an additional meeting of the CVRC, which may not be feasible given such a short timeframe. City. Manager Rowlands stated that the regularly scheduled meeting of the CVRC, will be June 2200. Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director Smith stated her understanding from the CVRC was that rather than doing a facilitated workshop on June 28th, staff will bring everything back on the June 22od. Page 10 - CVRC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov May 25, 2006 ACTION ITEMS (continued) City Manager Rowlands stated that all information and materials relevant to the proposed discussion would be provided to the CVRC Board and all interested public groups, prior to the June 22nd meeting. Ms. Moctezuma requested clarification ofthe meeting schedules. Director Lewis requested and received clarification that there would not be a CVRC meeting following the Council Budget meeting on June 8, 2006. ACTION: Chairman Padilla clarified that the motion had been made by the Chairman and seconded by Vice Chairman McCann, to continue this item with the direction that those representative groups be contacted, and there be some public outreach prior to this design application coming back to the CVRC Board; and it is the direction of the CVRC Board to staff, that at the June 22nd meeting of the CVRC is where the public hearing will be conducted on considering a process for public participation. The motion carried 8-0, with Director Paul absent. RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RECOMMENDING THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (I) APPROVE DESIGN REVIEW PERMIT (DRC-05-50); AND (2) ADOPT AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT FOR EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR TENANT IMPROVEMENTS TO MODIFY AN EXISTING 25,742 SQUARE-FOOT STRUCTURE LOCATED AT 320 THIRD AVENUE FOR THE OPERATION OF A NEW ATHLETIC FITNESS HEALTH CLUB (FANCHER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES) OTHER BUSINESS 6. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORTS a. Cancellation of June 8 CVRC meeting. 7. CHAIRMAN'S REPORTS There were none. 8. DIRECTORS' COMMENTS There were none. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Padilla adjourned the Regular Meeting of the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation at 8:43 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting on June 22, 2006, at 6:00 p.m. The Regular Meeting of June 8, 2006 has been cancelled. ~--q~ ana M. Smith, Secretary Page II - CVRC Minutes http://www.chulavistaca.gov May 25, 2006