Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1982/08/03 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Tuesday, August 3, 1982 Council Chamber, Public Services Building ROLL CALL Councilmen present: Mayor Cox, Councilmembers McCandliss, Scott, Malcolm, Moore Councilmen absent: None Staff present: City Manager Cole, City Attorney Lindberg, Assistant City Manager Asmus, Development Services Administrator Robens The pledge of allegiance to the Flag was led by Scout Vincent Charfauros, Troop 889, Parkview Elementary School, followed by a moment of silent prayer. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES for the meeting of July 27, 1982 MSUC (Malcolm/Scott) to approve the minutes as mailed. 2. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY - None 3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS a. Presentation by Watt Industries: "Concept of forming an assessment district for Summit Point" Mr. Joe Davis, President of Watt Industries, San Diego, gave a brief background of the development (east of 1-805 at the extension of East H Street); Proposi- tion 13 and its impact; restructuring of the various programs; the economic situation; inability to generate capital; lenders' concerns with the feasibility of the project. Mr. Davis petitioned for the creation of an assessment district for the Summit Point project noting the breakdown of the proposed $6,712,577 allocated to the assessments. Council discussion followed during which Mr. Davis answered questions pertaining to the method of assessment distribution; feasibility of including a fire station in the proposal; concept of approving the assessment petition district. MSUC (McCandliss/Scott) to refer to staff for analysis and have it set for a Council Conference. Discussion of the motion involved the date for the Conference; the delay in the construction of H Street; the advantages of having the conference. City Manager Cole suggested the date of August 26 with the "P" Modifying District item moved to September 23. It was the concurrence of the Council that the City Manager recommend the date for the conference. b. Mr. Bob Graham, 1425 Second Avenue, Chula Vista 92011, representing the California Senior Legislators of San Diego County, stated that the Assembly selected ten bills this year relative to the improvement of living conditions for the senior citizens - seven of these bills are being considered by the legislators. Mr. Graham added that the Assembly will meet on October 4-5-6, 1982; however, financing City Council Meeting -2- August 3, 1982 for the meeting has been deleted from the State budget. To meet these expenses, the seniors are selling raffle tickets and Mr. Graham asked if there were any legal ramifications in selling the tickets in Chula Vista. The City Attorney answered that compliance with their "technical memo" from the State would satisfy the requirements of this City. c. Mr. Cliff Roland, 1100 Industrial Boulevard, Chula Vista 92011 submitted a copy of Resolution 10785 to the Council which set a policy allowing non-resident students the right to purchase a monthly ticket for the Municipal Golf Course. Mr. Roland stated that a student was denied recently the purchase of this monthly ticket and asked that Council direct staff to adhere to this policy and allow the student to purchase this ticket. MSUC (Cox/McCandliss) to refer this back to staff for a report back to Council - perhaps an oral report next week - and staff given instructions to carry out the policy of the resolution. d. Mr. Howard Evans, 1431 Camellia Court, Chula Vista discussed the trash collection in the City - the 13% that do not utilize the service - the 13% that dump their trash in public or private dumpsters - and the loss of revenue to the City. Mr. Evans suggested a colored-sticker program (similar to license plate tags) whereby these stickers could be permanently attached to the trash cans and would be good for one year (different colors for each year). The trash company would only pick up those cans with the stickers. MSUC (Cox/Scott) to take the comments made by Mr. Evans and refer these to staff to be brought back to the Council at the same time the staff will docket the other item (report on trash collection pickups). Assistant City Manager Asmus stated that the report has been docketed for next Tuesdays' meeting (August 10, 1982). 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS a. Request from Larry Stirling, Assemblyman, for assistance regarding a proposal for a change in budget proceedings MSUC (Cox/Malcolm) to support the position of Assembl3nnan Stirling and direct staff to prepare a letter indicating City's reasons for desiring earlier adoption of State budget, proposed date of adoption, positive and negative aspects associa- ted with the current law, the expected fiscal impact of the proposed change, ways in which the new proposal might alleviate old problems and ways in which it might create new problems, particularly in the transition year. b. Request from Charles Brennan for 12-month extension on tentative map for Bri ghtwood Vi 11 age MSUC (McCandliss/Moore) to refer to staff for processing through Planning Commission. City Council Meeting -3- August 3, 1982 PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 5. PUBLIC HEARING - APPEAL BY SUE HUDSON OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A RESIDENTIAL CARE FACILITY FOR ADULTS 62 YEARS AND OVER AT SECOND AVENUE AND C STREET (Director of Planning) This being the time and place as advertised, Mayor Cox opened the public hearing. Principal Planner Lee submitted a plot plan noting the location of the proposed development and explaining the applicant's proposal for a conditional use permit to establish a 105-unit residential care facility for seniors (62 years and older) on a 2.1 acre site located in an R-1 zone. The lot extends through to the west side of the north end of Las Flores Drive extended northerly from D Street. The Planning Commission denied the application based on the lack of compatibility of the land use with the area; the staff concurs with that recommendation. Susan K. Lay, Planning Consultant, Royal Engineering and Development Company, 4338 Altadena Avenue, San Diego 92115, presented a petition containing 202 signatures registering support for the proposed project. She detailed the applicant's proposal noting the architectural concept, the ingress and egress, height of the buildings, advantages of constructing the complex in a residential zone, listed the adjacent land uses and asked for approval based on (1) the project can pay for itself - the City will realize a net revenue instead of a deficit; (2) it will generate 22 direct jobs; (3) and the City can move forward in realizing its housing goals. Jim Fetridge, Tuffnell, Fetridge Architects for Royal Engineering, 74-841 Velie Way, Palm Desert 92260 and Ronald D. TuffOell submitted sketches of the proposed facility explaining the architectural features, landscaping and parking spaces. Sue Hudson, 54 Antigua Court, Coronado 92118, the applicant, asked for Council's approval of .the residential care facility. Mrs. Esther Schorr, representing the Gray Panthers, 4080 Hancock, San Diego described the senior housing project that she resides in stating that this proposed facility will be just as harmonious. Speaking in opposition were: Lawrence F. White, M.D., 138 Second Avenue, Chula Vista; Linda Navarro, 9 Second Avenue, Chula Vista; John M. Fall, Administrator of Fredericka Manor, 183 Third Avenue, Chula Vista; Robert Van der Meid, 20 Second Avenue, Chula Vista; Philip B. Lopez, 164 Second Avenue, Chula Vista; Carol Smith, 275 Sea Vale Street, Chula Vista; Robert E. French, 129 Second Avenue, Chula Vista; Jane Simpson, 25 Second Avenue, Chula Vista; Newton Chaney, 292 Sea Vale Street, Chula Vista; Mrs. Joe Travisani, 149 D Street, Chula Vista and Mr. Moor, 69 Minot Street, Chula Vista. In summary, their objections were: (1) it would start a precedence whereby other similar type and commercial facilities would intrude into their residential area; (2) it would block the neighbor's sunshine; (3) generation of more traffic; (4) there are already two other residential care facilities on this street; (5) the site is not adequate for senior citizen housing; (6) the area would lose its charm and heritage; (7) conducive to the deterioration of senior citizens' City Council Meeting -4- August 3, 1982 moral; poor access; concerns of children going to school in connection with the traffic problem; there is a need for more residential care facilities but not in this neighborhood; the dangerous intersection at C and Second Avenue and the number of accidents that have occurred here; there will be parking along Second Avenue and the road is not wide enough for this. There being no further comments, either for or against, the hearing was declared closed. Council discussion ensued regarding the merits of the proposed facility at this particular location; the need for the seniors to have adjacent shopping areas; the location being inappropriate; and the significant impact it would have on the neighborhood. MSUC (Cox/Malcolm) to deny the appeal. RECESS was called at 8:56 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 9:08 p.m. 6. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE WIDENING AND REALIGNMENT OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD AND THE PUBLIC NECESSITY TO ACQUIRE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SLOPE RIGHTS TO ACCOMPLISH THE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS (Continued from the meeting of July 13, 1982) (City Engineer) City Engineer Lippitt reported that the developers are studying an alternative proposal relative to the design of Telegraph Canyon Road and the necessity of taking rights-of-way to accommodate the improvements. He requested that more ti.me be allowed to work on this alternative recommending the hearing be continued to September 7. MSUC (Cox/Scott) to continue the public hearing to September 7, 1982. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES, FIRST READINGS 7. RESOLUTION 10967 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH DONALD R. HEYE WAIVING THE RIGHT TO PROTEST THE FORMATION OF A SEWER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (City Engineer) As a condition of the negative declaration on Initial Study #82-24, the owner of Hyspan was to enter into an agreement to not protest the formation of an improvement district to install sewers in the future to serve the Otay Valley area. Mr. Donald Heye has executed his portion of the agreement and it is now ready for City'~ approval. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN SCOTT, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. 8. RESOLUTION 10968 EXTENDING THE TIME ON AN ENTRY PERMIT TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SAID EXTENSION (Director of Parks and Recreation) By Resolution No. 10549 and 10881, Council granted the County of San Diego an Entry Permit to the Municipal Golf Course to allow County work crews to reconstruct a dip section in Central Avenue and to make other improvements to the Central Avenue roadway. The time period for the original permit was from July 14 to December 31, 1981 and for the eecond permit until June 8, 1982. Because of an unexpectedly high water table and the need to modify the method of construction, the County has not been able City Council Meeting -5- August 3, 1982 to complete the Central Avenue project and is requesting a third extension of time to December 31, 1982. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MOORE, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. 9a. REPORT ON EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE SERVICE FOR MARCH 15, 1982 TO JUNE 15, 1982 Director of Personnel Thorsen submitted the second quarterly report noting the number of the total workforce utilizing the service. MSUC (Malcolm/Moore) to accept the report. 9b. RESOLUTION 10969 EXTENDING CONTRACT FOR EMPLOYEE ASSISTANCE SERVICES (Director of Personnel) The Employee Assistance Program has been in existence for 1-1/2 years and it has sur- passed objectives for Total Workforce Penetration and Total Troubled Employee Workforce Penetration. The original objectives were to reach 1% of the total work- force and 20% of the total troubled workforce; however, in the first l-l/2 years, the Total Workforce Penetration is 5.7% and the Total Troubled Employee Workforce Pene- tration is 71%. The Director of Personnel states that the figures indicate a need for the services of Mr. Rogers. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN SCOTT, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. 10. ORDINANCE 1995 AMENDING TITLE 9 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING THERETO A NEW CHAPTER 9.06 RELATING TO SECURITY ALARM SYSTEMS - FIRST READING (Director of Public Safety) The ordinance requires registration of all alarm companies and alarm agents. It also requires alarm users to obtain a User's Permit. No fee shall be charged for the registration of the User's Permit; however, a penalty assessment is established for excessive false alarms with further conditions allowing 'no response'by the Police to the alarm for failing to correct the problem. The ordinance further pro- vides for a 90-day 9race period for existing companies to register and allows a six-month grace period for new installations to have their systems operating properly before a penalty will be assessed. MSUC (McCandliss/Moore) to place the ordinance on first reading, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. 11. ORDINANCE 1996 AMENDING SECTION 8.08.070 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ANNUAL INSPECTION FEES FOR SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE SAN DIEGO COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT - FIRST READING (City Attorney) The County Health Department provides certain services for the City in the way of health inspections for which they are paid a fee in accordance with the schedule adopted by the County. The City pays for the performance of such services within the incorporated area. In order to recoup the full cost, it is necessary to have the City's local inspection fees the same as those established by the County. MSUC (Moore/Malcolm) to place the ordinance on first reading, the reading of the text was waivedby unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. City Council Meeting -6- August 3, 1982 CONTINUED MATTERS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 12. RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR SEWER CONNECTION OF PROPOSED CONDOMINIUMS AT 345 K STREET (Continued from July 27, 1982) (City Engineer) City Engineer Lippitt submitted a plat of the area noting the diagram of the sewer assessment district established for this area in 1926. The resolution of intention (in 1926) notes that the lO' of this property was in the original assessment district and it appears unreasonable that the property would not have been reasonably assessed accordingly. The purpose of the ordinance is that when any property connects to a sewer would pay $16 per front foot for the right to connect to the City sewer unless they are in a reimbursement district or have paid for the construction of that sewer. Based on all of this information, the City Engineer recommended no assessment be made on this property. MSUC (Scott/Moore) to accept the City Engineer's recommendation. 13. ORDINANCE 1993 GRANTING TO CHULA VISTA SANITARY SERVICE A FRANCHISE TO COLLECT AND DISPOSE OF REFUSE AND TO USE THE PUBLIC STREETS AND PLACES WITHIN THE CITY FOR SAID PURPOSE - SECOND READING AND ADOPTION (City Manager) On July 27, 1982, the Ordinance was placed on first reading. The term of the franchise is for five years. *MSUC (McCandliss/Malcolm) to place the ordinance on second reading and adoption; the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. 14. ORDINANCE 1994 AMENDING SECTION 19.14.583 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE BY DEALING WITH THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE APPEAL PROCEDURE - SECOND READING AND ADOPTION (City Attorney) This amendment deletes the statement that a simple majority of a quorum of the Plan- ning Commission may act on an appeal of the decision of the Design Review Committee. The Ordinance was placed on first reading at the meeting of July 27, 1982. MSUC (Scott/McCandliss) to place the ordinance on second reading and adoption; the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. 15. RESOLUTION 10970 CALLING AND GIVING NOTICE OF THE HOLDING OF A SPECIAL ELECTION FOR TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 1982 FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBMITTING A NUMBER OF PROPOSITIONS AMENDING THE CHARTER AND CONSOLIDATING SAID ELECTION WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THE SAME DATE (City Clerk) At the Council Conference held July 29, 1982, discussion was held on the wording of the various Charter amendment to be placed on the ballot, as recommended by the Charter Review Committee. Staff was directed to bring 'back a resolution incorporating all the Propositions and calling the election. Councilman Malcolm discussed the wording of the Proposition which deals with the * "As per minutes of 2-17-83, Councilman Scott's vote should have been an absention." City Council Meeting -7- August 3, 1982 salary for the Mayor. He suggested approving Alternate3 but changing the amount from $29,500 to $24,000. MSUC (Scott/Malcolm) to place this Proposition on the ballot and changing the salary from $29,500 to $24,000. (Mayor Cox abstained from voting) RESOLUTION OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN SCOTT, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. 16. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A POLICY FOR THE PROCESSING OF THE SANDER SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY AND DETERMINING THAT THE COUNCIL WILL CALL A SPECIAL ELECTION TO SUBMIT THE ISSUE OF THE SANDER PROJECT TO THE QUALIFIED ELECTORS OF THE CITY BY INITIATIVE (City Attorney) At the Council Conference held July 29, 1982, the City Council directed that a reso- lution be brought back establishing this Policy. Council discussioninvolved the issue of a Voluntary Referendum as opposed to that of an Initiative; brief comments on the procedure; support of placing the Proposition on the November ballot to get a higher turnout of voters; cost of the special election. MS (Scott/Malcolm) to place the Initiative on the ballot in November. Speaking against the project and in favor of placing the question on the ballot were: Norman Rudd, 461 Emerson Street, Chula Vista; Deborah Johnston, 885 Riverlawn, Chula Vista~ Bob Maxwell, 473 Berland Way, Chula Vista; Bud Pocklington, 656 Glover Place, Chula Vista. Councilwoman McCandliss spoke of the need for the Council to get all of the information on this project before submitting it to a vote of the people. Development Services Administrator Robens stated that the draft environmental impact report will be ready on September 3; however, the final report will not be ready until mid-November. The fees for the trash rates, tipping fees, etc. will not be known until January 1983. There is the 45-day mandatory public review period of the report also to be considered. Mr. Robens added that the SANDER people are on "fast-tracking" and claim they will be able to meet the requirements for the industrial development bonds by mid-December; however, he feels this schedule may be unrealistic. He further commented that the project is a 140 million dollar one and his recommendation would be not to "fast-track'' but to proceed with all deliberations in a timely manner. Councilman Malcolm said he listened to the tapes of meetings involving the SANDER project and that the SANDER people promised the Council that the Environmental Impact Report would be due in August - now the staff is telling the Council that it may be January. Councilman Malcolm declared that he feels the Council has been misled. Mayor Cox remarked that the best action would be for the Council to follow the procedures established by State law for proposals coming in for development: docket it, schedule for public hearing by the Planning Commission, certify the EIR, make a decision and then forward it to the City Council. The Mayor added that to put it on the November ballot would be subverting the normal process for projects coming City Council Meeting -9- August 3, 1982 Council discussion ensued regarding the time-issue involved and the need for more information before action will be taken. MSUC (McCandliss/Scott) to refer this matter to the staff. c. LAFCO Meeting - Blatt Reorganization (Meeting of August 2, 1982) Mayor Cox reported that LAFCO postponed decision on this annexation until September 17, 1982. At least two members of the Board felt that because of the Montgomery Annexation, they should not process any more annexations to this City. Councilman Scott discussed the contract with the Montgomery Fire District whereby the City allowed them a certain amount of money whenever the City annexed property from that area. In turn, the Montgomery Fire District agreed not to protest the annexations. Councilman Scott suggested the City 'start the 90-day clock' on cancelling this contract. MSUC (Scott/Moore) for staff to bring back a recommendation on the contract that the City has with Montgomery and whether or not the contract should be cancelled. The report to contain the dollar amount that has already been exchanged. 19. COUNCIL COMMENTS a. Councilwoman McCandliss asked for a status report on the senior citizens ad hoc committee. b. Councilwoman McCandliss discussed resurrecting the idea of having a program budget instead of a 'line-item' budget. MSUC (McCandliss/Malcolm) staff to look into preparing a program budget for next year and whether or not that would be advantageous. c. Councilman Malcolm reported that Kapiloff's Bill 1152 is now dead (Port District funds). d. Councilman Moore reminded the Council to reserve the dates of August 18-20 for the visit of the delegation from Odawara, Japan. The Council recessed to Closed Door. Session at 10:25 p.m. The City Clerk was excused and the City Manager reported that the meeting ended at 11:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT at ll :00 p.m. to the meeting scheduled for Tuesday, August 10, 1982 at 7:00 p.m.