HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1987/11/09 MINUTES OF A WORKSHOP OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Monday, November 9, 1987 Council Conference Room
7:00 p.m. City Hall
MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Cox, Councilmembers Nader, Moore,
McCandliss, Malcolm
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Goss, City Attorney Hatton
BAYFRONT LAND ACQUISITION
Mayor Cox announced that he received, late this afternoon, a
response from Chula Vista Investment Company to the purchase of
the Santa Fe land on the Bayfront. He questioned City Attorney
Harron as to whether or not this would be a proper Closed Session
item. The City Attorney noted that if the Council finds that this
item came up after the posting of the agenda, it would be legal to
go discuss it.
MSUC (Cox/Nader) to place this item on the agenda, noting that it
came to the attention of the City Council after the posting of the
agenda.
MSUC (Cox/McCandliss) to recess to Closed Session for discussion
of the potential acquisition of property at the Bayfront.
The Council recessed to Closed Session at 7:07 p.m. and the
meeting reconvened at 7:46 p.m.
Mayor Cox announced that Watt Industries, known as Chula Vista
Investment Company responded to the City's efforts to purchase
property at the Bayfront. Council/Redevelopment Agency hired
Steve Delaney and Richard J. Fartell, whose firm is known as Top.
Mark, to represent the City in negotiations with Watt Industries.
They have been negotiating since September to arrive at a mutually
ur price. oday, Chula ista Investment Company
acceptable p chase ' T V
issued a press release stating that those efforts have ceased to
reach a mutual conclusion. Mayor Cox said that this was
regretable, that the City has been negotiating in good faith but
has not been able to come to a mutual agreement.
In September, the Redevelopment Agency took a 3-prong action
approach to resolve the problems along the Bayfront. The first
was to attempt to purchase the Santa Fe property under the Watt
ownership which is now a "dead-end" at this point.
MINUTES 2 November 9, 1987
Second, to resubmit the City's Local Coastal Program - that effort
is ongoing and the initial draft of that will be done sometime
this week.
Third, to sit down with the Sierra Club to identify alternatives
for the hotel site on Gunpowder Point to see if there is another
agreeable site. These last two efforts are ongoing.
Mayor Cox further stated that the City Council submitted its offer
for the purchase of the property higher than that recommended by
its consultants. The price was $13,500,000 but this was not
acceptable to Chula Vista Investment Company.
At this time the Mayor temporarily left the meeting and Mayor pro
Tempore Moore presided over the balance of the meeting.
1. INTRODUCTION BUD GRAY
Bud Gray, Consultant for the City's General Plan update stated
this is the fifth or sixth conference held on the General Plan
Update. This particular workshop deals with the public works
facilities, the wastewater planning, the drainage and flood
control planning and the solid and hazardous waste control
planning. Mr. Gray introduced Jeff A. Olsen, Senior Project
Manager of Engineering Science, Inc., who did the study.
Mr. Olsen submitted a written outline of his presentation to the
City Council. Since he followed this presentation exactly, it is
made a part of the minutes and attached hereto.
Mayor Cox returned to the meeting at 8:30 p.m. but Mayor pro
Tempore Moore continued to preside over the balance of the meeting.
In answer to Council's questions pertaining to the purpose of this
conference and various aspects of the presentation, Mr. Bud Gray
stated that in any growth management plan there must be an update
of the General Plan. This particular workshop is the one which
identifies the major infrastructures that will go along with
whatever land use the City Council decides on. As to the figures
presented by Mr. Olsen, Mr. Gray stated that it is his experience,
the engineering figures are high rather than low.
Director of Planning Krempl stated the question is are there any
constraints from an engineering perspective that would preclude
any scenario land use given the threshholds, population and so
forth. He declared there is nothing inherent in the area of any
of the three scenarios which would constrain the City Council to
select a policy of which direction they want the City to go to.
Director Krempl added that the goals and objectives need further
discussion and more input as to the Council's visions of specific
issues. There is another workshop scheduled for the 23rd of
November at which time the Director will answer Councilman Nader's
previous question regarding whether or not there could be a
MINUTES 3 November 9, 1987
university/regional shopping center in one of the scenarios and
still retain the residential characteristics. A third meeting
will be scheduled sometime in December which will be a wrap-up
meeting concerning infrastructures and traffic and to find out
which direction the City Council wants to go: which scenario
should be developed.
At that last meeting, the Director will also present fiscal
results to the Council on the revenues of the scenarios and the
operating expenses for each. Director Krempl then handed out the
colored maps of the three scenarios showing the build-up of each.
Mayor pro Tempore Moore thanked Mr. Olsen for his presentation and
Mr. Gray and adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT AT 8:50 p.m. to the regular meeting of November lO,
1987 at 7 p.m.
O113C
5280 CARROLL CANYON ROAD, SUITE 240
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC. TELEPHONE:S19/453-9650
CITY OF C~F~A VISTA
PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY PLAN
BRIEF OVERVI~q OF '£ua~ PHASE I WORK
OBJECTIVE
STUDY AREA
SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
EASTERN TERRITORIES
CENTRAL CHULA VISTA
PROJECT APPROACH
WATER FACILITIES PLANNING
WASTEWATER PLANNING
DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL PLANNING
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL PLANNING
PROJECT STATUS
REMAINING WORK
PHASE II WORK E~FORT
A SUBSIDIARY OF THE PARSONS CORPORATION
5280 CARROLL CANYON ROAD, SUITE 240
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC. TE~_E.HONE: e~9/,53-e~so
WATER FACILITIES PLANNING
RESULT S[~4MARY
S C E N A R I 0
1 2 3
EASTERN TEI!RI:TO~TR.c: (OTAY WATE~ DISTRICT)
o AVERAGE DAY DEMAND (MILLION GALLONS PER DAY) 14.6 21.1 26.4
o STORAGE REQUIR~4ENTS (MILLION GALLONS )
OPERATIONAL 5.6 11 . 3 13.8
EMERGENCY 96.0 140.7 163.1
o REQUIRE PIPING IMPROV]~MENTS (MILES) 38.0 48,0 65.0
o ESTIMATED FACILITY COSTS (MILLION $) 40.5 50,3 59.1
o ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COSTS (MILLION $) 19,2 24,0 27,5
CENTRAL CNOLA VISTA (SW~i~ATER AU'PI~ORITY)
~' STORAGE REQUIREMENTS (MILLION GALLONS)
OPERATIONAL 2.1 2.2 2 · 4
EMERGENCY 0 0 0
o REQUIRED PIPING IMPROVEMENTS (MILES) 4.0 4.0 4.0
o ESTIMATED FACILITY COSTS (MILLION $) 3,0 3,1 3,2
o ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATION
AND MAINTENANCE COSTS (MILLION $) 5.5 5.9 6.0
A SUBSIDIARY OF THE PARSONS CORPORATION
5280 CARROLL CANYON ROAD, SUITE 240
SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92121
ENGI NEERING-SCIENCE, INC. TEt_EPHONE: 5~e / 483-ees0
WAST~ATER FACILITIES PLANNING
RESULT S~4ARY
S C E N A R I 0
1 2 3
o AVERAGE DAILY FLOW (MILLION GALLONS PER DAY) 3.7 5.2 8.0
o REQUIRES COLLECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS (MILES) 19.1 25.4 35.1
° ESTIMATED FACILITY COSTS (MILLION $) 4.3 6.7 10.6
~ ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COSTS (MILLION $) 1.1 1.7 2.3
CENTRAL CBULA VISTA
° AVERAGE DAILY FLOW (MILLION GALLONS PER DAY) 5.0 5.0 5.0
o REQUIRED COLLECTION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS (MILES) 1.5 1.5 1.5
o ESTIMATED FACILITY COSTS (MILLION $) 0.5 0.5 0.5
~ ESTIMATED ANNUAL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COSTS (MILLION $) 1.5 1.5 1.5
REQUIRED TREATMENT CAPACITY
~ EXISTING CONTRACT CAPACITY - 19.1 MGD
° EXISTING CAPACITY IN USE - 12 MGD
e SPHERE OF INFLUENCE - MGD 21.4 23.7 26.1
A SUBSIDIARY OF THE PARSONS CORPORATION
5280 CARROLL CANYON ROAD, SUITE 240
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC. TE~_E~'HONE: 819 / 453-9680
DRAINAGE AND FLOOD COM~kKOL PLANNING
RESULT S~e4ARY
DESIGN CRITERIA
o PROVIDE FOR 100-YEAR STORM CONDITIONS
o MINIMIZE RMQUIRED IMPROV~ENTS IN CENTPJLL CHULA VISTA
° PROVIDE FOR SEDIMENT CONTROL TO MINIMIZE FUTURE O&M COSTS
S C E N A R I 0
I 2 3
EASTERN TERRITORIES
o CHANNEL IMPROVJ'IMENTS (MILLION $) 4.6 7.8 12.7
° DETENTION BASINS (MILLION $) 1.9 3.7 3.8
o TOTAL ESTIMATED FACILITY COSTS (MILLION $) 6.5 11.5 16.5
~ TOTAL ESTIMATED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COSTS (THOUSAND $) 90 163 235
CENTRAL CMULA VISTA
~ CF, ANNEL IMPROVEMENTS (MILLION $) 4.5 4.5 4.5
o DETENTION BASINS (MILLION $) 0 0 0
o TOTAL ESTIMATED FACILITY COSTS (MILLION $) 4.5 4.5 4.5
~ TOTAL ESTIMATED OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
COSTS (THOUSAND $) 52 52 52
A SUBSIDIARY OF THE PARSONS CORPORATION
5280 CARROLL CANYON ROAD, SUITE 240
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC. TeEPHONe 5~9/,53~~S0
SOLID AND HAZARDOUS WASTE CONTROL PLANNING
RESULT SE~e~ARY
SAN DIEGO COD]~TY REGIONAL SOLID WASTE
MANAG]~fE~FE PLAN DATA (1986)
o EXISTING SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
ANTICIPATED CLOSURE DATES
OTAY LANDFILL - 1999
BORREGO LANDFILL - 2005
MIRAMAR LANDFILL - 1995
SAN MARCOS LANDFILL - 1991
o EXISTING HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL SITES
CASMALIA RESOURCES LANDFILL
(Santa Maria, California)
KETTLEMAN HILLS
(Kettleman City, California)
EASTERN TERRITORIES
o REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT SETBACK FROM
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE - 1000 FEET
o REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT SETBACK FROM
HAZARDOUS WASTE DISPOSAL SITE - 2000 FEET
(Otay Landfill & Omar Renderings)
S C E N A R I 0
1 2 3
o SOLID WASTE PROJECTIONS 43,000 72,000 97,000
(TONS PER YEAR)
° HAZARDOUS WASTE PROJECTIONS
(TONS PER YEAR) 800 1 , 300 1 , 700
CENTRAL CHULA VISTA
e SOLID WASTE PROJECTIONS 68,000 69,000 70,000
(TONS PER YEAR)
o HAZARDOUS WASTE PROJECTIONS 500 500 500
(TONS PER YEAR)
A SUBSIDIARY OF THE PARSONS CORPORATION
5280 CARROLL CANYON ROAD, SUITE 240
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92121
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE, INC. TELEPHONE: 619 / 453-96S0
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY PLAN - PHASE I
ALL TASK S~!~ARY
S C E N A R I 0
1 2 3
EASTER!I TERRITOPJ. ES FACILITIES COSTS
(MILLION $)
o WATER FACILITIES 40.5 50.3 59.1
o WASTeWATER FACILITIES 4 · 3 6 · 7 10 · 6
° DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL FACILITIES 6.5 11.5 16.5
° SOLID/HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES N.A. N.A. N.A.
C~2tTRAL CUU~A VISTA FACILITIES COSTS
( MILLION $ )
o WATER FACILITIES 3.0 3.1 3.2
o WASTeWATER FACILITIES I . 5 I . 5 I . 5
° DRAINAGE AND FLOOD CONTROL FACILITIES 4.5 4.5 4.5
~ SOLID/HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITIES N.A. N.A. N.A.
K~Y FACTORS OR LIMITATIONS FAVORING SEE,ECTION OF ONE SC~!AaIO OVER THE NEXT
B~SED ON INFRASTRDCTOF, E Z~EQOIPa24ENTS
ISSUE RESPONSE
~ AR~ EXISTING FACILITIES ADEQUATE FOR ANY OF
THE SCENARIOS? NO
o CAN FACILITIES BE CONSTRUCTED TO SERVICE ALL
OF THE SCENARIOS? YES
o IS WASTEWATER TREATMENT CAPACITY A LIMITATION? NO
~ IS WATER AVAILABILITY A LIMITATION? NO
e ARE SOLID/HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE CAPACITIES
A LIMITING FACTOR? NO
~ IS ADEQUATE PLANNING UNDER WAY BY CONTROL
AGENCIES TO ACCOMMODATE ANY OF THE SCENARIOS? YES
o COULD THE FACILITY COSTS BE A LIMITING FACTOR? YES
A SUBSIDIARY OF THE PARSONS CORPORATION