HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1989/09/26 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday, September 26, 1989 Council Chamber
4:00 p.m. Public Services Building
Regular Meeting
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Malcolm X , McCandliss X , Moore X ,
Nader X , Mayor Cox
Staff: Assistant City Manager Asmus, City Attorney Harron,
Principal Management Assistant Lieberman
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Special meeting of August 29, and the regular
meetings of September 12 and 19, 1989.
Councilman Malcolm noted a correction to the minutes of August 29, the second
~aragraph, stating that a discussion was not held and preferred the term
'commented" be used.
MSUC (Moore/Malcolm to approve the meetings with the correction on the meeting
of August 29, as noted. Councilmembers McCandliss and Malcolm abstained from
the minutes of August 12; Mayor Cox abstained from the minutes of September
19; Councilman Moore abstained from the minutes of September 29,
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. David C. Nielsen gave a presentation and updated Council on the Olympic
Training Center, noting there would be a briefing held for staff on the
architecture. He left pictures for Council's review
CONSENT CALENDAR
Items pulled: lO (deleted), 13, 15, 12
Councilman Malcolm noted he would abstain from voting on item 5c.
BALANCE OF CONSENT CALENDAR OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MOORE, the reading of the
texts was waived, passed and approved with Councilman Malcolm abstaining on
Item 5c.
5. WRITFEN COFe4UNICATIONS
a. Resignation from Chula Vista 2000 Parks & Recreation Committee - Diana
Lee, P.O. Box 384, Potrero, CA 92063-0384
The letter was accepted with regret.
Minutes - 2 ~ September 26, 1989
remove concrete from property at 66l
b. Request to waive requirement to
Redlands Place - Kamel Hindi, 661 Redlands Place, Bonita 92002
Council referred the request to staff to determine the reasonableness of this
request, with a report to come back to Council.
c. Request for waiver of Development Impact Fees - Daniel Malcolm, 625
Third Avenue, Chula Vista 92010-5791.
Council denied the request.
6. RESOLUTION 15314 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AND THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT
RELATING FOR PROMOTIONAL SAILING EVENTS AND
AUTHORIZING llJE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
The Redevelopment Agency approved an agreement with the San Diego America's
Cup Task Force to fund international sailing activities around Chula Vista
Harbor. The contract was made contingent upon the City reaching an agreement
with the San Diego Unified Port District which would provide $50,000 in Port
funds to be used with the $25,000 in Agency funds for this purpose.
(Assistant Director of Management Services)
7. RESOLUTION 15315 APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AND HUBERT A. CHRISTENSEN AND MARGARET
SCO~-BLAIR, OWNERS OF 311 F STREET, CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA
The lease agreement provides for leasing a building at 311 F Street for office
and temporary recreational activities currently held at Norman Park Center.
Part of the bull ding will be sublet by the City to the County of San Diego on
a month-to-month basis for temporary housing of Health Department nurses and
clerical staff. (Assistant City Manager)
8. RESOLUTION 1531 6 APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AND THOMAS O. ME/U)E FOR OTAY LAKES ROAD
ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS AND THE STREET AND DRAINAGE
DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES UPDATE AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT
Recently Mr. George Simpson, City Project Manager for Development Impact Fees
and Acquisition District, passed away. It is necessary that a new project
manager be retained to carry on the work that had been anticipated to be done
by Mr. Simpson and which is beyond the staff's expertise.. The agreement
retaining Mr. Meade was approved.
9. RESOLUTION 15317 ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THAT CERTAIN
SUBDIVISION KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS TELEGILAPH
VILLAGE
Tel egraph Village Apartments, Ltd. has completed the requirements of public
improvements for the Telegraph Village subdivision. The improvement agreement
was approved by Council on October 15, 1986, by Resolution 12793. (Director
of Public Works)
Minutes - 3 - September 26, 1989
lO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS CONTRACT WORK
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF 12-INCH RELIEF SEWER FROM
QUINTARD STREET TO 288 FEET SOUTH BETWEEN
SECOND AVENUE AND THIRD AVENUE IN THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
This item was deleted from the agenda prior to the meeting.
ll. RESOLUTION 15318 AGREEMENT FOR THE PREPARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED OTAY RANCH PROJECT
EIR-90-O1
The City of Chula Vista is the lead agency for the preparation of
environmental documents for the Otay Ranch Project. A joint City/County team
recommended the selection of Dames and Moore for this roject. Council
approved the agreement. (General Manager, Otay Ranch Project~
12. ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 2.52.040, 2.52.050 AND 2.52.060
AND ADDING SECTIONS 2.52.105, AND 2.52.165 TO
THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION PROHIBITION,
DISQUALIFICATION AND DISCLOSURE (first reading)
Pulled from Consent Calendar.
13. REPORT HOBILEHOME RELOCATION TASK FORCE
Pulled from Consent Calendar.
14. REPORT FLAG BURNING SERVICE AT EUCALYPTUS PARK ON
COLUMBUS DAY, OCTOBER g, 1989
The Fleet Reserve Association has requested permission to conduct a flag
burning ceremony in Eucalyptus Park on Columbus Day. Council granted
permission subject to certain conditions.
15. REPORT ON REQUEST TO WAIVE IMPACT FEES FOR RISEN
SAVIOUR EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH
Pulled from Consent Calendar.
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
16. PUBLIC HEARING PCM-89-20 AND PCS-89-8; CONSIDERATION OF A
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN AND TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP KNOWN AS WOODCREST SOUTHWESTERN,
CHULA VISTA TRACT 89-8, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE
OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD BETWEEN APACHE DRIVE AND
BUENA VISTA WAY - WOODCREST DEVELOPMENT
(Director of Planning)
RESOLUTION 15319 APPROVING SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN AND
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP KNOWN AS WOODCREST
SOUTHWESTERN, CHULA VISTA TRACT 89-8, LOCATED ON
THE NORTH SIDE OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD BETWEEN
APACHE DRIVE AND BUENA VISTA WAY
Minutes - 4 - September 26, 1989
This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox declared the public
hearing open.
Director of Planning Krempl presented slides and reported that the applicant
submitted a sectional planning area plan and tentative subdivision map known
as Woodcrest Southwestern, CVT 89-8, in order to subdivide 19.2 acres into 54
singl e-family 1 ors and one open space 1 ot. The property is 1 ocated on the
north side of Telegraph Canyon Road between Buena Vista Way and Apache Drive
in the P-C zone.
Mr. Krempl added that the issues in terms of the property were a street
connection to the west, involving a knuckle as opposed to the street extending
out to Buena Vista. Staff feels it is appropriate to have a pedestrian access
rather than a vehicular access until there is a clarification as to the land
use in the surrounding area. The second issue has to do with a buffer
treatment adjoining the residences to the west. They are proposing a 15 foot
wide landscape buffer. The proposed development has a restriction of nothing
over 6' in height within that buffer, fencing at the rear of the lots and'a
restriction against any second story rear balconies along certain lots to
ensure privacy to those residences located at the west. The third issue is a
vacant piece of property southeast; with the intent to make sure there is
adequate access stubbed out to that property. Discussion is going on as to
where that stub street is located and what extent of improvement takes place.
There is a tentative agreement on both the location and extent of improvement
on grading.
Mr. Krempl also noted conditions 10, ll, 35, and 36, which had to do with the
agreement to provide terminal water storage to the satisfaction of the Otay
Water District, compliance with the City's threshold standards; the owner of
the property to not protest the formation of a district for the construction
of the Telegraph Canyon Channel; and compliance with the City's pending Growth
Management program. He noted that staff recommends adding Condition 39, which
has to do with the City's water reclamation within the subdivision.
Robert J. Giangreco, 1391 La Mancha Place, property owner in the development
area noted his approval of the development and the cooperation of the
developer in seeing that there was no great impact on the neighborhood. He
noted the restrictions on the balconies and buffer zones on lots 23 to 29 and
noted that the owner on lot 22 had requested him to ask to be included in
this. Mr. Giangreco also noted some concern with the issue of the knuckle on
Santa Cruz Court. He felt the safety of the children walking to the new
elementary school was very important; if this was opened up it, would be
another busy street the children would have to cross. He urged that Council
keep this section closed.
Dave Young, 1395 La Mancha Place noted he was not in opposition to the project
but just wanted to address Council as to some of his concerns. He noted that
initially, the six new neighbors in his area were his main concern, this was a
unique situation and it should be addressed in the future since there is so
much building going on; appreciated being included in the CCR's; the developer
has done all he could do with the constraints they had; developer agreed to
put smaller homes in the back of his area; noted balconies could not be built;
as long as all they agreed upon comes through, he has no real objection.
Minutes - 5 - September 26, 1989
Ron Van Daele, 5473 Kearny Villa Road, Ste. 210, San Diego, Woodcrest
Development requested that Council consider a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) variance
on three lots. The overall project has a FAR of .37, which is below the
standard 4.5 FAR, but there is a problem with three lots. They had to place a
roadway in to access an adjacent piece of property. He requested that the FAR
be increased from .45 to .49 on lot four; .48 on lot five; and .49 on lot
six. Staff has agreed to this request.
Director Krempl noted that this request is consistent with City policy on
other planned communities.
In response to Council's question, staff noted that the average size of the
lot was 8,900 square feet. Park & Recreation would become responsible for the
open space walkways. As for condition #39, the applicant is responsible for
one-half the pro-rated cost of the reclaimed water line to be installed on
Telegraph Canyon Road based on their frontage and based on the best estimate
at the time the final map is recorded.
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was closed.
MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) to amend the resolution to allow the FAR be increased
from .45 to .49 on lot four; .48 on lot five; and .49 on lot six.
RESOLUTION, AS AMENDED AND WITH ADDITIONAL CONDITION #39, OFFERED BY
COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived, passed and approved
unanimously.
Mayor Cox asked if it was possible to all ow additional homes to be developed
to conserve the open space landscapes.
Mayor Cox noted that on the east of the map there were two existing single
family dwellings and asked if it was possible to contact the out-parcel owner
and allow allow additional homes to be developed on the frontage of that
street in consideration of vacation of the balance of that property to
preserve the open space scenic highway.
City Attorney Harron responded that he would like to take a closer look at
this, noting the question of the density transfer to somewhere else, so the
City could require the property on the slope to be kept as open space.
Hotton Day, 1481 Telegraph Canyon Road, representing the property owner, noted
they have worked with the Planning Commission on this. They tentatively have
ideas of building 12 units on that piece. A problem with this is that the
Planning Commission wants to downzone the property. He noted that when, and
i f the time comes, the City wants that piece of property and will not
downzone, they would be willing to work with the City.
Councilman Nader stated that it was his understanding that the traffic
thresholds would not be met prior to the completion of the Telegraph Canyon
Road.
MOTION
ll~'d~F) that occupancy not occur prior to the completion of the Telegraph
Canyon Road widening project. The motion died for lack of second.
Further Council discussion followed regarding the acceptable level of service
h
(b), the current level of service (e), and t e peak hour allowance (d); the
scheduled completion date of the Telegraph Canyon project.
Minutes - 6 - September 26, 1989
Councilman Malcolm, referring to Mayor Cox' request regarding contacting the
out parcel owner, asked if Mr. Zobel and his client would be willing to
cooperate in this, knowing that they have an approved map now, and if it did
not create problems for Woodcrest, to disclose to the buyers that this
property is going to the City.
MOTION
l~Tr~'61m/Cox) referred to staff knowing that if Woodcrest sa~'s this does not
work geologically, engineering or disclosure wise that's fine, but if there is
a way to work it out, a good point has been made. The motion passed
unanimously.
17. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER GRANTING A FP~ANCHISE FOR REFUSE
COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL TO EDCO DISPOSAL
CORPOP~ATION
ORDINANCE 2335 GP~ANTING TO EDCO DISPOSAL CORPORATION, ITS
SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A FRANCHISE TO COLLECT
AND DISPOSE OF REFUSE AND TO USE THE PUBLIC
STREETS AND PLACES WITHIN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
FOR SAID PURPOSES (first reading)
On September 5, 1989, Council approved an ordinance amending the exclusive
franchise with Laidlaw Waste Systems for trash collection within the City of
Chula Vista. The amendment allowed a single exception to the agreement's
exclusivity, permitting the Sweetwater Union High School District to award a
contract for trash collection services to school sites within the City of
Chula Vista to a contractor other than Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc. when the
contract was competitively bid. Since the School District has awarded a
contract to EDCO Disposal Corporation through a competitively bid process, a
resolution was adopted concurrently with the ordinance amendment which gave
notice of intent to grant a trash franchise to EDCO Disposal Corporation and
set a public hearing for September 19, which was continued to this meeting.
(City Attorney)
This being the time and place as advertise, the public hearing was declared
open. There being no public testimony, the public hearing was closed.
ORDINANCE OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was waived, passed and
approved with Councilman Malcolm voting no.
18. PUBLIC HEARING ON ANNUAL SUBMITTAL OF GRANTEE PERFOPJqANCE REPORT
(GPR) TO THE U.S. DEPARllqENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT (HUD)
RESOLUTION 15320 APPROVING THE 1988-B9 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT GRANTEE PERFOPJqANCE REPORT FOR SUBMITTAL
TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE )LAYOR TO EXECUTE
SAME
The report details the use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds
during 1988-89 and shows the progress achieved and the status of funds. HUD
reviews the GPR to determine whether the City is implementing its CDBG protram
and projects in a timely manner. (Acting Director of Community Development
Minutes - 7 - September 26, 198~
This item did not need to be noticed as a public hearing and, with Council's
consent, was approved under the Consent Calendar.
19. PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED REPROGRAMMING OF FEDERAJ_ REVENUE
SHARING FUNDS
RESOLUTION 15321 APPROVING REPROGPJUqMING OF FEDERAL REVENUE
SHARING FUNDS
RESOLUTION 15322 APPROPRIATING $250,244,48 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED
RESERVE OF THE GENERAL FUND TO CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENT PROjECTS
This substitution of funds will not result in funding reductions in either
the capital or operating budgets. (Principal Management Assistant)
This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox declared the public
hearing open. There being no public testimony, the public hearing was closed.
ORDINANCE OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the text was waived, passed and
approved unanimously.
20. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CHANGE TO OPEN SPACE AREA BOUNDARY
IN OPEN SPACE DISTRICT NO. 18
RESOLUTION 15323 DECLARING PROPERTY TO BE SURPLUS, UNUSABLE PUBLIC
LAND, WAIVING THE FORMAL BIDDING REQUIREMENTS AND
AUTHORIZING AN EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY WITH RANCHO
DEL SUP PARTNERSHIP
Ordinance 17.08.390 requires a public hearing whenever changes to open space
area boundaries are proposed. (Director of Parks Recreation)
This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox declared the public
hearing open.
Director of Parks & Recreation Mollinedo noted that there has been a request
to increase the total amount of square footage by 1500 square feet; staff has
no problems with the request.
Jerald Alford, Telegraph Canyon Medical Partnership, 2445 Fifth Avenue San
Diego 92101, presented a brief history of the location, described the parcel
and presented slides. He noted there was a need for an additional area of
proposed parking. They proposed to exchange a part of the parcel for an open
space area owned by Rancho del Sur.
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was closed.
Mayor Cox asked if there were modifications to be made on the resolution
before Council this evening. Staff noted there was an adjustment to be made
to Exhibit A but not to the resolution; there was no money exchanged in the
transaction.
RESOLUTION WITH CHANGE ON EXHIBIT A, OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the reading of the
text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-1 (Councilman Malcolm out).
Minutes - 8 - September 26, 1989
OTHER BUSINESS
21. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
a. Howard Smith, 897 Mesa Place, Chula Vista, addressed Council with his
concerns regarding an auto dealership that is to be sited at H street.
He stated he was against placing a dealership there.
Mayor Cox responded that at this point, the land in question is just
being discussed. If there is any action to be taken, a public hearing
will be held.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
13. REPORT MOBILEHOME RELOCATION TASK FORCE
Housing Coordinator Mitch Thompson noted that the Task Force met over the last
four months and the report presented the culmination of that work. He also
noted that the Task Force was split on the recommendations. Mr. Thompson
reported that there were three strategies for the City to consider in
addressing the mobilehome relocation problem. He recommended pursing one of
the three alternatives which includes part of both the majority and minority
recommendations of the Task Force as follows: l) not to pursue development of
a new park, 2) explore the possibility of acquiring an existing park, and 3)
develop other additional housing solutions.
Alan Campbell, Task Force member, commended the group that he worked with. He
noted they became quite informed on mobilehome and trailer park issues;
although the majority and minority were split on issues, they agreed on a lot
of things; there is definitely a need to address the problems of mobilehome
residences, closures, and the needs of those people who will be forced to seek
other housing; there is a need for broader direction from the City; suggested
that Council create on-going Citizen Advisory Committee to address all
segments of society.
Councilwoman McCandliss questioned Alternative 1 and noted that they were
pursuing the options to satisfy housing needs; she asked what would be
adequate to address the need.
Mr. Campbell noted this is a far reaching issue; they were not sure any of the
solutions would satisfy all the needs. They have no answer to the problem, as
they got into more issues and City ownership; they felt it went far beyond
that; in discussing the issue of City ownership or management, they felt City
may be taking on more social issues and going into a partnership they should
not be going into; it was assumed if the City bought property, the City would
have to upgrade and maintain the parks which could perpetuate the problem of
no one wanting to leave.
In answer to Councilwoman McCandliss question, Housing Coordinator Thompson
noted that in preparing the report they felt it would be difficult to pursue
two options, but, they would have to pursue one or the other at some point in
time; they could pursue an existing park as a primary alternative and leave
the option open for development of a new park.
Minutes - 9 - September 26, 1989
Councilman Moore noted he concurred with the minority report of an existing
park; it is more economical; has potential for becoming a condominium park for
risk" in closing trailer parks because of zoning conditions; they
are zoned commercial/industrial.
Councilman Nader asked if there was any consideration given to where the
appropriate location would be.
Housing Coordinator Thompson did not take a position on a location; found nine
sites but could not come to a consensus, he did not find that any of them were
suitable
Mr. Campbell responded that generally, the acquisition of an existing park
should be in the area around Broadway, close to bus lines and other services.
The Sweetwater site was studied, but the Task Force felt it was impractical at
that point; they did not come up with a favorable site.
Speaking in favor of staff recommendations were: Victor A. Nolan, 12 Via
Barbarini, Mobilehome Issues Committee; Walter M. Doughty, 246 Broadway, #45,
Chula Vista; Mike Bell, lll North Second Avenue (KOA), Chula Vista; Bob
Flaugher, MOPAC, llO0 Industrial, I-lO, Chu1 a Vista; W. Scott Frazeur, 444
Anita, #19, Chula Vista; Bernardo Murillo, Palomar Trailer Park, 568 Palomar
#14, Chula Vista; James B. Acton, 265 Nixon P1 ace, Chula Vista; Rosa Alvarez,
168g Broadway, #35, Twin Palms Trailer Park, Chula Vista; James Lovett,
Bayscene Trailer Park, lO0 Woodlawn, #75, Chula Vista; Mary-Frances Click,
Minority Task Force, llO0 Industrial Blvd, Chula Vista; Carolyn Willjams, 134
First Avenue, Chula Vista.
Collectively, they noted: too much variety in parks, i.e. singles and doubles
mixed; most of the spaces will have to be designated single/double, which can
be tacky; shopping/transportation does not have to be limited to a downtown
area; what kind of criteria could you come up with; majority tentatively
approved Alternative #1; money should come back into the parks; solution is to
fezone; more tenants will take the money and not use it to find new housing;
you are leasing mobilehome with trailers; need to get rid of the drug abusers
and winos to keep parks clean; support of majority opinion #1 sensible
thinking to it; if you move tenants somewhere else you will just perpetuate
problem; you are buying problems if you buy an existing park; gas, electrical
lines are problematic and not taken care of i.e., Orange Tree Mobilehome Park;
no water/sewer pressure; more viable to buy new park; can get new trailers; no
need for pools, golf courses, need for parks and playgrounds for children;
time for a decision to be made on this; between 80-901 of these people cannot
afford homes; take advantage of offer that has been made; this will downgrade
property; some of the mobilehomes 1 ook worse than they are; good idea to
relocate rather than redevelop; most of the problems arise because the people
are low income; City has not responded to requests to help with repairs;
before Council decides anything, send someone out to check which trailers
could be moved out; urged Council to follow original course of action and
forget this solution; if Council does not help them, they will become another
group of homeless; actual percentage of spaces available not there; need to
find new location with new pipes and facilities; if it is possible for City to
help them, it would be great; members of minority report noted mandate; with
new parks you can create new sections; close to KOA
Minutes - lO - September 26, 1989
- would not be unsightly and for older people this would be centrally located;
stressed mobilehome parks are civilized; can not afford single-family homes'
thinks there should be two kinds of parks or bull d to accommodate two types of
coaches; wants to see ordinance enforced - many ways this could be done;
retired/el derly planning lifestyle for retirement, younger families can move
in other rent controlled places.
Walter Sas, 246 Broadway, #1 Chula Vista addressed Council as to his
concerns: there is a difference in mobilehomes and trailers; we are talking
about trailer parks; does not need golf courses or swimming pools provided by
City and does not want the City to step in; very frustrating dealing with City
government; happy where he is; need special permits to move these trailers;
these commissions should go and walk through a park to see what is going on;
building department has started inspection of these units; Council should go
out and get involved to see what is going on; City should not be a landlord.
Council discussion followed noting: a 14 acre site at Sweetwater Regional
Park; Council purchased; redevelopment was suggested about four years ago;
need to settle this problem; cited Al's Trailer Haven as the most successful
program - most or all of the people were re-located; as parks, close City will
not be able to accommodate more - should that be expected, too; strict
enforcement of mobilehome ordinance would not do any good; to pursue
development of new parks will not be successful; 14 acres may be used for a
sports complex; suggested looking to the parks that exist now and use
low/moderate income funds and find existing parks even if the City has to
upgrade; through attrition this problem will be addressed.
Councilman Moore suggested a solution would be to amend page 3 on the staff
read. "t,at the City Co..cil re-desig.ate the prese.t ,obile,ome
t Task Force to the Chula Vista Housing Advisory Committee to make
recommendations on affordable housing needs in the City and along with that
add, "with the first priority being a relocation program for trailer park
residents living in parks at risk of closing due to zoning and not limit that
to acquisition of the present park." This would would put the majority and
minority together.
MOTION
ollF66~/Malcolm) Council to re-design present Mobilehome Relocations Task Force
to the Chula Vista Housing Advisory Committee with the first priority being a
relocation program for trailer park residents living in parks at risk of
closing due to zoning, and if Council agrees, acquisition of a present park.
Councilman Malcolm noted that some time ago, Father Carroll from the St.
Vincent de Paul Center had offered to build and develop a piece of property
with the only stipulation being that some of the people who had been through
his program be allowed to stay at that site. This would have been six or
seven spaces at a cost of $165 per month. The City had a chance to do this
and at that time, there was much opposition to this from residents.
Councilman Malcolm noted he had met with Mr. Scott Scott, the adjacent
property owner, some time ago and he would be willing to consider City space
as open space provided Mr. Scott develop his property as a mobilehome park and
provided that the City property be provided with baseball fields, soccer
fields etc. for the youth. He is not willing to develop City property
Minutes - ll - September 26, 1989
without seeing what will ha pen with the balance of the property. It is the
City's responsibility to ta~e care of these people will be affected by
that
~Tk closures. He asked that Council continue to look at City property and
Scott's property and maybe a compromise could come about with the
residents in that area.
Mayor Cox asked for a restatement of the motion on the floor.
MOTION RESTATED
Council to re-design present Mobilehome Relocations Task Force to the Chula
Vista Housing Advisory Committee with the first priority being a relocation
program for trailer park residents living in parks at risk of closing due to
zoning, and their primary duty, in that priority, could be acquisition of a
present park.
Councilwoman McCandliss asked what this referral would accomplish. The one
park that closed relocated 100% of the people; this has worked because there
are still some parks left to take people. She feels it is the responsibility
of the park owner to relocate the people. Are we creating a situation that is
forcing these parks to close? What about buying existing parks? Take low
cost land and develop it to try to solve this community's need. If some of
these issues are in this referral, then she will go along with the motion.
Councilman Moore responded that staff would have to re-work the ordinance;
there needs to be a criteria developed.
Councilman Nader stated he does not like this. He is not optimistic about the
image of the City, that Chula Vista is insensitive to the homeless of the
City; Councilman Malcolm made some good points, his proposal is, in concept,
the best proposal Council has heard. It does not cost the taxpayers anything
other than the land acquisition which comes from funds that cannot be spent on
anything other than low income housing.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION
(Nader/Malcolm) directed the Committee to come back with a report identifying
the site for the proposal from Councilman Malcolm.
VOTE ON AMENDMENT TO MOTION
Ine motion carried unanimously.
VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED
The motion carried unanimously.
MOTION
~/Malcolm) staff to come back with implementing policies for the proposed
housing alternative in Alternative l, and with a recommendation for
appropriate zoning policies consistent with City policy that no one in a
mobilehome or trailer park lose their home without having an affordable
substitute.
Council discussion followed regarding the rezoning policy; the difference
being that the mobilehome parks have that zoning and in order for those to be
closed down there would have to be a public hearing. As to trailer parks,
they are on land zoned either R-3 or commercial. The intent of the motion was
not a zoning policy but a change in the City's closing of parks.
Minutes - 12 - September 26, 1989
Councilman Nader responded that his intent was that what is before Council for
consideration is a zoning ordinance that would allow the City to fezone some
of the parks to preserve an existing or similar use, to ensure these people
are not going to be made homeless when they close. He noted he would include
in his motion a direction to staff to come back with proposed amendments to a
relocation ordinance to be sure it achieves its objective that those who lose
their homes have a comparable place to go.
Councilman Malcolm agreed to include this in the motion.
Mayor Cox asked for a restatement of the motion.
MOTION RESTATED
1. Staff to come back to Council with implementation measures for the
measures outlined in Alternative 1 in the staff report;
2. Possible interim rezoning measures to address the time between now and
whenever some other City program is in place to ensure adequate
relocation and;
3. Proposed amendment to the City's relocation ordinance to be sure it
achieves the objective to provide a comparable home to those who are
displaced by mobilehome and trailer park closures.
VOTE ON MOTION
The motion passed unanimously.
15. REPORT ON REQUEST TO WAIVE IMPACT FEES FOR RISEN
SAVIOUR EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH
At the City Council meeting held on September 19, 1989, Council received a
written communication from Pastor Rick Johnson of the Risen Saviour
Evangelical Lutheran Church requesting that development impact fees (DIF) be
waived or reduced for a church to be constructed in the Sunbow Development.
This report will address the issues raised by that request.
Budget Officer Byers noted that a revised agenda statement had been prepared
for Council reflecting a change in staff recommendation based upon the Task
Force recommendation.
The Task Force had made a recommendation for change in wording, he also noted
that recommendation #3 is not necessary since staff can administratively
change the fee collected for Transportation Development Impact Fee if it is
appealed. He recommended deleting recommendation #3.
Director of Public Works/Operations Swanson noted that the change he was
recommending regard the term "religious institution" In working with the
pastors, they indicated it be defined to read, "religious institution whose
primary purpose is as a place of religious assembly..."
Councilman Malcolm questioned the fees now and after Council adopts the
recommendation.
Staff responded that the DIF would be $40 per acre; the original fees were
based on commercial zoning. The fees quoted were $249,323; the fees with this
recommendation would be $21,430. The public facilities fees would be set at 4
'units per acre, which would be about a waiver of $13,000-14,000.
Minutes - 13 ~ September 26,
Rick Johnson, Pastor, Risen Saviour Lutheran Church, 391 Bay Leaf, Chula Vista
noted a church as a non-profit organization should be exempt from these fees,
al though they would abide by staff's recommendation; the Task Force
recommended the change in wording to avoid having to pay additional fees that
may be imposed later if they were add a day-care or pre-school; would like to
know what fees will be imposed on them; they cannot buy the property until
they know how much they will be assessed in fees.
City Attorney Harron noted his concerns regarding one of the tests to
determine if governmental action is unconstitutional which is, if the primary
purpose is to advance/inhibit religion, then it's unconstitutional. By
looking at the report, this was unclear.
Budget Officer Byers clarified that for the Transportation DIF, the figures
were generated by SANDAG, these fees were not being waived. The definition
for religious institution is the same as that used by the City of San Diego;
therefore, they are not addressing the City Attorney's concerns, it is really
a land use issue dealing with the number of trips that would be generated by
this particular land use. For the Public Facilities Impact Fees, the
consultant is fine-tuning this, the only impact the church would have on this
would be on the Fire Suppression system, but it was his opinion that it was
not the church impacting those public facilities, the population is.
Father John Proctor, 2934 Deacon Drive, Pastor, Corpus Christi Church, Bonita,
stated that he is concerned regarding the DIF because he is unsure of the tax
ackage; his is the largest of the churches and his tax package would have
Been in of $.5 million; intent of Task Force to recommend that the
excess
formula be for all churches; bought property three years ago; only revenue
they generate is from tax payers who have already paid; desire for City to
make situation possible for these institutions to exist; he supported staff
recommendation.
MOTION
C'('C6'~/McCandliss) to accept revised staff recommendation deleting
recommendation #3 and modifying recommendation #l to read as stated.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION
(Nader) to exempt non-commercial public service activity from the Development
Impact Fee. The motion failed for lack of second
VOTE ON MOTION
)he motton carried unanimously.
12. ORDINANCE 2334 AMENDING SECTIONS 2.52.040, 2.52.050 AND 2.52.060
AND ADDING SECTIONS 2.52.105, AND 2.52.165 TO
THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION PROHIBITION,
DISQUALIFICATION AND DISCLOSURE (first reading)
The proposed ordinance would: prohibit campaign contributions prior to
January 1 of an election year; aggregate contributions from officers and
of a. orga.ization and req.ire abste.tion if t.ey total more t.a.
; extend the period during which a Councilmember must abstain when the
aggregated contribution exceeds $2,500 to the Councilmembers entire term in
office; require notice when a candidate contributes $5,000 or more of personal
funds
Minutes - 14 - September 26, 1989
to the campaign; clarify and emphasize the prohibition against "coerced"
contributions; define "agent" consistent with the definition in the California
Administrative Code (Section 18438.3); clarify that when a candidate is
running for reelection or another city office, the candidate may seek
contributions from people who contributed to his or her prior campaign.
Mayor Cox asked if the stipulation on receiving campaign contributions that is
embodied in Proposition 68, applies to elected officials.
City Attorney Harron responded that it did not, the initiative limited itself
to State legislators.
Mayor Cox then questioned the section on limitations, and asked if they
(Council) could assume then, that if in the event of a special election, they
could not collect any funds until January 1. He noted there should be some
other provision added that campaign contributions would be limited to no more
than 90 or 60 days before the election, or the requirement would not apply in
the event of a special election.
City Attorney Harron responded that a special section could be added saying
that when there is a special election, contributions can be raised between the
date the vacancy is declared and the date of the special election.
MOTION
l'C'6~/Moore) to modify the ordinance as presented by the City Attorney. The
motion carried unanimously (5-0-0).
MOTION
~oore) to reduce the notice period for candidates contributions to their
own campaign to 21 days prior to the el ection. The motion carried unanimously
(5-0-0).
ORDINANCE, AS AMENDED, OFFERED BY MAYOR COX,
Council discussion followed noting the following concerns: regarding
aggregate contributions, the elimination of corporations, businesses,
associations left only individuals able to contribute; the record-keeping
would be too much of a hurdle; Propositions 73 and 68 is making it necessary
to keep two sets of books now - one for fiscal and one for calendar year;
could not support a shift in the aggregate from $250 to $2,500; there has
never been a problem with this, the system now is ok; the intent is to create
as level a playing field as possible for others who want to run for Council.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION
(Moore/Cox) to approve the item as set forth and that the provisions
pertaining to the aggregate be deleted from the ordinance (Section 2.52.165)
Discussion followed regarding record keeping, integrity of City officials,
the burden of monitoring falling upon the elected official; what the
aggregate applies to (officers or agents of an organization); definition of
agent; prohibition of voting when exceeding the aggregate; organizations
P
(Chamber of Commerce, TA's, etc.) being unable to participate; enforcement of
ordinance being up to the City Attorney not the FPPC.
Minutes - 15 - September 26, 1989
AMENDMENT
(Malcolm/Nader) to lower the aggregate from $2,500 to $500. The motion passed
3-2-0 (Councilmembers McCandliss and Moore voted no).
ORDINANCE, AS AMENDED, OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, the motion carried unanimously
(5-0-0).
Councilman Moore asked for clarification on the vote and questioned if it was
his motion that was voted on. Mayor Cox noted it was the amended motion by
Councilman Malcolm; Councilman Moore noted his should have been a no vote.
MOTION
ol~F6~'F~/McCandliss) to reconsider vote on actions taken. The motion carried
4-1-O (Councilman Nader voted no).
VOTE ON SUBSTITUTE MOTION
(Malcolm/Nader) to c"h'~ge the aggregate amount from $2,500 to $500. The
motion failed 2-3-0 (Mayor Cox, Councilmembers McCandliss and Moore voting no).
VOTE ON DELETION OF AGGREGATE
No vote.
SUBSTITUTE TO MOTION
(Nader/Malcolm) to adopt the ordinance with a $1,000 aggregate. The motion
passed 3-2-0 (Mayor Cox and Councilmember Moore voting no).
VOTE ON ORDINANCE, AS AMENDED
The motion carried 4-1-0 (Councilman Moore voted no).
22. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) None.
23. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Norman Park Senior Center Renovation
b. Designation of voting and alternate voting delegates, Annual Congress of
Cities, November 25-29, lg89, Atlanta, Georgia
c. Scheduling of interviews for Parks & Recreation Commission
d. Proposition C workshop - October 19, 3:00 p.m., Silver Room, Community
Concourse
It was agreed by Council to continue these items to the meeting of October 3,
1989.
24. COUNCIL C)ENTS
a. Discussion on setting public hearing times at 6:00 p.m. Council agreed
to a compromise and set the public hearing times at 6:30 p.m.
MSC (Malcolm/Moore) that public hearing notices be published with a time set
at 6:30 p.m. (The regular first Tuesday meeting at 4:00 p.m. still stands at
that time.) (Mayor Cox voted no.)
Minutes - 16 - September 26, 1989
The City Council adjourned to Closed Session at ll:O0 p.m. to discuss
acquisition. of the foll owing properties: 4555 Ot~ Valley road (Shell Oil
Co., owner); 4501 Otay Valley road (Roderick & Patricia Davies, owners);
Parcel 624-060-27 on Otay Valley road (Vincent & Margaret Davies, owners);
4705 Otay Valley Road (Jimmie & Judi Shinohara, owners); Parcel 644-040-40
(Walker Scott Properties/South Bay, owner); Parcel 624-040-45 (Atomic
Investments, Inc., Leonard Teyssier, owner); East H Street - Paseo Del Rey and
Tierra Del Rey; Health Center, 263 Fig Avenue (City of Chula Vista owner,
County of San Diego Lessee); 31 5 Fourth Avenue (Richard Zogob, owner);
Bayscene Mobilehome Park, 100 Woodlawn Park (Richard Hall, owner); potential
litigation; pending litigation: Cabrera v. City of Chula Vista; SDG&E v. City
of Chula Vista; FERC/CPUC - SDG&E merger proceedings.
ADJOURNMENT AT 12:15 a.m. to the Regional Sewer Workshop with the San Diego
City Council and Metropolitan Sewer Task Force on September 28 at 4:00 p.m. in
the San Diego Convention Center; to a joint meeting with the Chula Vista 2000
subcommittee on September 28, 1 989 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber to hear
Jim Bell, speak on environmental issues and; to the regular meeting of October
3, 1989 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber
Re pectfully bmitted,
c ~~.~, CITY CLERK
by:
Acting Deputy City Clerk
1656C