HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Packet 2002/09/10
~~f?
~.--=
~::: ¿
CllY OF
CHUlA VISTA
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 2002 COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6:00 P.M. PUBLIC SERVICES BUilDING
(immediately following the City Council meeting)
JOINT MEETING OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY I CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
Agency/Council Members Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas; Chair/Mayor Horton
CONSENT CALENDAR
The staff recommendations regarding the following item Is) listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted
by the Agency/Council by one motion without discussion unless an Agency/Council member, a member of the
public or City staff requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items,
please fill out a "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary of the
Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be
discussed after Action items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - August 6, 2002, August 20, 2002, August 27,
2002
2. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
EXTENDING FOR ONE YEAR INTERIM ORDINANCE NO. 2836-A
PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OR EXPANSION OF OUTDOOR
STORAGE USES AND TOLLING THE OPERATION OF EXISTING OUTDOOR
STORAGE USES WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS- On
August 21, 2001, the Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2836-B,
extending for one year Urgency Ordinance 2836-A, prohibiting the
establishment or expansion of outdoor storage uses and tolling the operation
of existing outdoor storage uses within the redevelopment project areas.
Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 19.12.130, the ordinance was adopted
on an urgency basis and took effect immediately upon passage to protect
the public safety, health, and welfare. Adoption of this urgency ordinance
will extend urgency ordinance 2836-A for one additional year.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council place the ordinance on second reading
for adoption.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the Redevelopment Agency on any subject matter
within the Agency's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law, however, generally prohibits
the Redeveiopment Agency from taking action on any issues not inciuded on the posted agenda.) If you wish
to address the Agency on such a subject, please complete the "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency or City Clerk prior to
the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up
action.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by
the Agency, staff, or members of the general pubilc. The items will be considered individually by the Agency
and staff recommendation may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak,
please fill out a Request to Speak form available In the lobby and submit it to the Secretary to the
Redevelopment Agency or City Clerk prior to the meeting.
3. AGENCY RESOLUTION APPROVING AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION
AGREEMENT WITH BARONE-GALASSO AND ASSOCIATES AND THE
OLSON COMPANY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE "E" STREET TRANSIT-
ORIENTED-DEVELOPMENT (TOD) PROJECT PROPOSAL LOCATED AT AND
ADJACENT TO 707 "F" STREET (OLD CITY CORPORATION YARD SITE),
DEEMING WAIVED CERTAIN OWNER PARTICIPATION RIGHTS AND
DIRECTING STAFF AND DEVELOPER TO WORK WITH DESIGNATED
PROSPECTIVE OWNER-PARTICIPANTS -_Redevelopment Agency staff have
been in discussions with several prominent urban development entities
during the past year regarding the potential redevelopment of properties
located around the Bayfront - E Street Trolley Station and the City's vacant
old corporation yard property (Exhibit A.) An initial concept plan has been
drafted by Barone - Galasso and Associates and The Olson Company to
develop a transit-oriented project on the super block bounded by the trolley
line, F Street, Woodlawn Avenue and E Street. The proposal includes
approximately 350 for-sale and rental residential units, 40,000 square feet
of commercial development, and a new park and ride parking structure.
[Community Development Director]
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Agency adopt the resolution.
PUBLIC HEARING
The following itemls) have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to
speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the
Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
4. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO
THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT - The Southwest
Redevelopment Plan was adopted on November 27, 1990 in order to
improve deteriorated properties in the areas along Main Street, south
Broadway, and south Third Avenue. Since its adoption, the Redevelopment
Plan has permitted the use of eminent domain authority to acquire property
within the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. Pursuant to the
Redevelopment Agency, September 10, 2002 Page 2
California Community Redevelopment Law and the Redevelopment Plan, the
Agency's eminent domain authority is restricted to an initial 12-year time
period following the effective date of the ordinance adopting the
Redevelopment Plan. The Redevelopment Plan's eminent domain authority
is scheduled to expire on November 27, 2002. [Community Development
Director] CONTINUED FROM THE MEETING OF 8/6/02
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Agency/Council open the public hearing and
receive testimony.
5. DIRECTOR'S REPORT(S)
6. CHAIR/MAYOR REPORTlS)
7. AGENCY/COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to the regular meeting of the Redevelopment Agency on
September 17, 2002, at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council
meeting in the City Council Chambers.
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), request individuals who
require special accommodates to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service
request such accommodation at least 48 hours in advance for meetings and five days for scheduled services
and activities. Please contact the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency for specific information at (619)
691-5047 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TOO) at (619) 585-5647. California Relay Service is
also available for the hea6ng impaired.
Redevelopment Agency, September 10, 2002
Page 3
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AND A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
August 6, 2002 4:00 p.m.
An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council and a Regular Meeting of the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista were caIled to order at 5:20 p.m. in the
Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista,
California.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Agency/Councilmembers: Davis, PadiIla, Rindone, Salas and
Chair/Mayor Horton
ABSENT: Agency/Councilmembers: None
ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director/City Manager Rowlands, Agency/City
Attorney Kaheny, and City Clerk Bigelow
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: July 9, 2002; July 23, 2002
Staff recommendation: Agency approve the minutes.
ACTION: Chair/Mayor Horton moved to approve staffs recommendation and offered the
Consent Calendar, heading read, text waived. The motion carried 5-0.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUPS-01-05) TO ALLOW THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A USED-CAR SALES LOT AND A ZONE VARIANCE FOR I)
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 420-SQUARE FOOT BUILDING TO BE LOCATED
ON THE REAR PROPERTY LINE, WHERE A 10-FOOT SET-BACK IS REQUIRED,
AND 2) A REDUCTION IN THE LANDSCAPE SET-BACK TO 10 FEET ALONG
THE STREET FRONTAGE ON MAIN AND SILVAS STREETS, WHERE THE
REQUIREMENT IS FOR IS FEET
The applicant proposes to develop the site at the northwest comer of Main Street and
Silvas Street. The proposed project includes a used-car sales lot and the construction of a
smaIl office and customer service building, as weIl as the associated parking lot, access
and circulation, and landscaped areas. The proposed project site is adjacent to a variety
of commercial and industrial uses along Main Street and Silvas Street. (Community
Development Director)
1-/
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
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.
Chair/Mayor Horton opened the public hearing. With no members of the public wishing to
speak, she then closed the hearing.
ACTION: Agency/Councilmember Davis offered Agency Resolution Nos. 1791 and 1792,
headings read, texts waived:
AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1791, RESOLUTION OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUPS-02-24) FOR THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A USED-CAR SALES LOT AT 2620 MAIN STREET
AND GRANTING A ZONE VARIANCE FOR I) THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
420-SQUARE FOOT BUILDING TO BE LOCATED ON THE REAR
PROPERTY LINE, WHERE A IO-FOOT SET-BACK IS REQUIRED, AND 2)
A LANDSCAPE SET-BACK OF 10 FEET IN WIDTH ALONG THE STREET
FRONTAGE ON MAIN AND SILVAS STREETS, WHERE THE
REQUIREMENT IS FOR 15 FEET
AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1792, RESOLUTION OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH ERNIE L.
AND PATRICIA A. DURAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 420-
SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPE AND
PARKING IMPROVEMENTS AT 2620 MAIN STREET WITHIN THE
SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
The motion carried 5-0.
3. CONSIDERATION OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTHWEST
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
The Southwest Redevelopment Plan was adopted on November 27, 1990 in order to
improve deteriorated properties in the areas along Main Street, south Broadway, and
south Third Avenue. Since its adoption, the Redevelopment Plan has permitted the use of
eminent domain authority to acquire property within the Southwest Redevelopment
Project Area. Pursuant to California Community Redevelopment Law and the
Redevelopment Plan, the Agency's eminent domain authority is restricted to an initial 12-
year time period following the effective date of the ordinance adopting the
Redevelopment Plan. The Redevelopment Plan's eminent domain authority is scheduled
to expire on November 27,2002. (Community Development Director)
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.
Page 2 Council/RDA Minutes I-.J.. 08/06/2002
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
James Simon, a consultant for the Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc, explained the eminent domain
process.
Chair/Mayor Horton opened the public hearing.
The following members of the public spoke in opposition to an extension of the eminent domain
authority:
Dealia Tahnentez, owner of property in the area since the 1950's, stated that the family
would like to sell the property but believed that the possibility of eminent domain could
bring down the property value.
Armando Ballesteros stated that he purchased his home five years ago as an investment
for his family and children.
Roger Cao-Romero stated that he has lived in his home for two years and is currently
remodeling it. His parents live in a second home on the property, and he expressed
concern about where he could afford to move his family and parents.
Paula Kari Kas stated that residential areas in commercial zones are not safeguarded by
eminent domain. She stated that her father-in-Iaw's family, who has lived in the area for
over 35 years, is subject to losing their home, and she believed that any fair market value
offered would not cover the cost to purchase another home.
Robin Griffith stated that she is currently in the design process for construction of a
restaurant on the comer of Broadway and Moss Street. She is investing a lot of money in
the project and would be subject to a 30-year lease.
Gary StovaIl expressed concern about the proposed commercial development so close to
his residence. He stated that he does not reside in a blighted area and has spent at least
$100,000 in home improvements. He is retired and cannot afford to purchase a new
home. Mr. Stovall expressed his desire to live in peace, without the threat of eminent
domain.
Suzann Ortiz stated that she owns rental property on Palm A venue and, also, her family
residence is in the area. She expressed concern regarding the potential impact of eminent
domain on her lifetime of struggle and savings in order to have affordable rentals and
investments.
Bill Pack stated that he would like a good quality of life for himself and his wife. His
wife is visually impaired but knows her way around their home and garden, and it would
be difficult for her to relocate elsewhere.
Monica Mendez spoke on behalf of her father, Francisco Pintado, who has lived in the
area for over 40 years. Mr. Pintado is concerned because he and many residents of the
area are retired and could not afford to purchase another home in Chula Vista. Ms.
Mendez added that the eminent domain would affect many families with a lot of history
in the area.
Page 3 Council/RDA Minutes 1- 3 08/0612002
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
Joe Bunero stated that his residence has been in the family for 44 years. His lot is very
large, and there is no way he could afford the price of a comparably sized property, He
added that younger people are buying and upgrading homes in the area.
Robert Moore spoke on behalf of the Hardesty family, stating that many properties have
been improved since the 1940's, and he believed it would be impossible for families to
find similar properties, should they have to relocate.
Jorge de Legone stated that his property on Broadway is within the commercial zone. He
explained that he purchased the property as an investment for his retirement
A member of the public (name not obtained), who is a real estate agent, spoke on behalf
of Dr. Troy, stating that Dr. Troy cannot find a buyer for his property since it is within
the redevelopment zone, and, as a result, she believed that Dr. Troy's retirement was
being jeopardized.
Geraldo Travers stated that eminent domain would only benefit businesses and not the
residents. He added that there are no affordable homes available for relocation, and he
asked the Council to take the voice of the people into consideration.
A member of the public (name not obtained) stated that it is stressful to have eminent
domain hanging over his head. Many residents have been living in the area since the
1960's, and the houses have large lots, which would be hard to find elsewhere. He
believed that many of his neighbors were not aware of the eminent domain notification
by the City, and he suggested that a public meeting be conducted with the affected
residents to obtain input or identify other issues.
A member of the public (name not obtained) said he could not afford to move elsewhere.
ACTION: Chair/Mayor Horton asked staff to meet with the community prior to the
September lOth public hearing. She then moved to continue the hearing to
September 10, 2002. Agency/Councilmember Davis seconded the motion, and it
carried 5-0.
Agency/Councilmember Salas suggested that some of the people affected by prior eminent
domain action, such as for the new police facility, be asked to share their experiences with those
in the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area.
Agency/Councihnember Rindone suggested that staff explain the benefits of eminent domain,
and how rarely it is applied, at the forthcoming community meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS
4. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
There were none.
Page 4 Council/RDA Minutes j- c/ 08/0612002
OTHER BUSINESS (Continued)
5. CHAIR/MA YOR REPORTS
There were none.
6. AGENCY/COUNCIL COMMENTS
There were none.
CLOSED SESSION
7. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING ANTICIPATED
LITIGATION - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b)
One Case
This item was not discussed, and no action was taken.
ADJOURNMENT
At 6:45 p.m., Chair/Mayor Horton adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of the
Redevelopment Agency on August 20, 2002, at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the City
Council meeting.
~~r~
Susan Bigelow, CMC, City Clerk
Page 5 Council/RDA Minutes 1- :J- 08/0612002
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AND A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
August 20, 2002 6:00 p.m.
An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council and a Regular Meeting of the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista were called to order at 6:38 p.m. in the
Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista,
California.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Agency/Councilmembers Davis, Padilla, and Salas
ABSENT: Chair/Mayor Horton, and Agency/Councilmember Rindone (both
excused)
ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director/City Manager Rowlands, Agency/City
Attorney Kaheny, and City Clerk Bigelow
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.A. CONSIDERATION OF THE EXTENSION OF AN INTERIM ORDINANCE
PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OR EXPANSION OF OUTDOOR
STORAGE USES AND TOLLING THE OPERATION OF EXISTING OUTDOOR
STORAGE USES WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS
On May 29, 2001, the Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2836-A to prohibit the
establishment or expansion of outdoor storage uses and tolling the operation of existing
outdoor storage uses within the redevelopment project areas. Pursuant to Municipal
Code Section 19.12.130, the ordinance was adopted on an urgency basis and took effect
immediately upon passage to protect the public safety, health, and welfare. As an interim
measure, the ordinance will be of no further force and effect 90 days from the date of
adoption unless the City Council, by a four-fifths vote, extends the ordinance for one
year. No more than two such extensions may be adopted. Unless extended, the urgency
ordinance will expire on August 27, 2002. (Community Development Director)
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.
Agency/Councilmember Padilla opened the public hearing. There was no one in the audience
wishing to speak.
ACTION: Agency/Councilmember Salas moved to continue the hearing to August 27, 2002.
Agency/Councilmember Davis seconded the motion, and it carried 3-0.
/- to
OTHER BUSINESS
2. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
There were none.
3. CHAIRIMA YOR REPORTS
There were none.
4. AGENCY/COUNCIL COMMENTS
There were none.
ADJOURNMENT
At 6:40 p.m., Agency/Councihnember Padilla adjourned the meeting to an Adjourned Regular
Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency on August 27, 2002, at 6:00 p.m., immediately following
the City Council meeting.
~¿L.U~~~
Susan Bigelow, CMC, City Clerk
Page 2 Council/RDA Minutes ! - ( 0812012002
MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF
THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
August 27,2002 6:00 p.m.
Adjourned Regular Meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Chula Vista were called to order at 7:28 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public
Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Agency/Co uncilm embers: Davis, Padilla, Rindone, Salas, and
Chair/Mayor Horton
ABSENT: Agency/ Councilm embers: None
ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director/City Manager Rowlands, Agency/City
Attorney Kaheny, and City Clerk Bigelow
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
I. CONSIDERATION OF THE EXTENSION OF AN INTERIM ORDINANCE
PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OR EXPANSION OF OUTDOOR
STORAGE USES AND TOLLING THE OPERATION OF EXISTING OUTDOOR
STORAGE USES WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS
On May 29, 2001, the Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2836-A to prohibit the
establishment or expansion of outdoor storage uses and tolling the operation of existing
outdoor storage uses within the redevelopment project areas. Pursuant to Municipal
Code Section 19.12.130, the ordinance was adopted on an urgency basis and took effect
immediately upon passage to protect the public safety, health, and welfare. As an interim
measure, the ordinance will be of no further force and effect 90 days from the date of
adoption unless the City Council, by a four-fifths vote, extends the ordinance for one
year. No more than two such extensions may be adopted. Unless extended, the urgency
ordinance will expire on August 27, 2002. (Community Development Director)
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.
Chair/Mayor Horton opened the public hearing. With no members of the public wishing to
speak, she then closed the hearing.
ACTION: Agency/Councilmember Davis offered Urgency Ordinance No. 2836-C for
adoption, Ordinance No. 2871 for first reading, and Agency Resolution No. 1793
for adoption, headings read, texts waived:
1- ff
PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued)
A. URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 2836-C, URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA EXTENDING FOR ONE
YEAR INTERIM ORDINANCE NO. 2836-A PROHIBITING THE
ESTABLISHMENT OR EXPANSION OF OUTDOOR STORAGE USES AND
TOLLING THE OPERATION OF EXISTING OUTDOOR STORAGE USES
WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS
B, ORDINANCE NO. 2871, ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA EXTENDING FOR ONE YEAR INTERIM
ORDINANCE NO. 2836-A PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OR
EXPANSION OF OUTDOOR STORAGE USES AND TOLLING THE
OPERATION OF EXISTING OUTDOOR STORAGE USES WITHIN THE
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS
C. RESOLUTION NO. 1793, RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE CITY
COUNCIL ORDINANCE EXTENDING FOR ONE YEAR INTERIM
ORDINANCE NO. 2836-A PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT OR
EXPANSION OF OUTDOOR STORAGE USES AND TOLLING THE
OPERATION OF EXISTING OUTDOOR STORAGE USES WITHIN THE
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS
The motion carried 5-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
2. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
There were none.
3. CHAIRIMA YOR REPORTS
There were none.
4. AGENCY/COUNCIL COMMENTS
There were none.
CLOSED SESSION
5. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING ANTICIPATED
LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(B)
One Case
Closed session was cancelled, and the above item was not discussed.
Page 2 Council/RDA Minutes 1- c¡ 0812712002
ADJOURNMENT
At 7:32 p.m., Chair/Mayor Horton adjourned the meeting to an Adjourned Regular Meeting of
the Redevelopment Agency on September 10, 2002, at 6:00 p.m., immediate]y following the City
Council meeting.
~/L.J~~~
Susan Bigelow, CMC, City Clerk
(-16
Page 3 Council/RDA Minutes 0812712002
SS'COND
f1€4D/M
ORDINANCE NO. - 'G .4ND -4Da
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA ~ON
VISTA EXTENDING FOR ONE YEAR INTERIM ORDINANCE NO.
2836-A ADOPTED ON MAY 29, 2001 PROHIBITING THE
ESTABLISHMENT OR EXPANSION OF OUTDOOR STORAGE USES
AND TOLLING THE OPERATION OF EXISTING OUTDOOR
STORAGE USES WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS
WHEREAS, on May 29th, 2001 the City Council adopted Interim Ordinance No. 2836-A prohibiting
the establishment or expansion of outdoor storage uses and tolling the operation of existing outdoor storage
uses within the redevelopment project areas; and
WHEREAS, on August 21,200 I the City Council extended the interim ordinance for one year after
the required notice pursuant to Municipal Code Sections 19.12.060 through 19.12.080 and public hearing;
and
WHEREAS, the extended interim ordinance will expire on August 27, 2002, unless the City Council
extends the interim ordinance for one additional year after the required notice pursuant to Municipal Code
Sections 19.12.060 through 19.12.080 and public hearing; and
WHEREAS, additional time is required to complete the required studies and analysis in order to
develop appropriate policy recommendations that address this issue; and
WHEREAS, it would be prudent to consider relevant studies and analysis that are now being
conducted for the General Plan Update, which has a bearing on the land use policies that would affect the
redevelopment project areas and outdoor storage uses; and
WHEREAS, iÌ is the intention of the City Council and Redevelopment Agency to maintain the
urgency ordinance in effect only until such time that the City Council and Redevelopment Agency adopt any
amendments to land use policies affecting outdoor storage in the various redevelopment project areas; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Manager has determined that this ordinance will not
have a physical effect on the environment and is therefore exempt from CEQA under Section 15308, Class 8
(Actions by regulatory agencies for protection of the environment).
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City ofChula Vista do
ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings.
A. Additional time is needed in order to complete the studies and prepare recommendations to
amend the policies affecting outdoor storage uses.
B. The City will not have the ability to make informed decisions regarding the permitting of
uses involving outdoor storage until the necessary studies are completed.
C. The Municipal Code provides for the extension of the interim ordinance for one additional
year if passed by a four-fifths vote of the City Council.
d.. -/ ~
D. This is a matter of importance to the various redevelopment project areas and is not directed
towards any particular parcel of property or proposed use.
SECTION 2. Prohibition and ToHing of Outdoor Storage Uses.
Within aH redevelopment project areas, the poJicies prohibiting, toHing, and excepting outdoor
storage uses shaH be as set forth in Interim Ordinance No. 2836-A adopted by the City Council and
Redevelopment Agency on May 29, 2001.
SECTION 3. Expiration Date.
This ordinance is adopted under the provisions of the Municipa1 Code Section 19.12.130 and shaH
extend the effective date of Interim Ordinance No. 2836-A adopted on May 29, 200 I for a period of one
more year. Accordingly, Interim Ordinance No. 2836-A shaH be of no further force and effect after August
27,2003.
SECTION 4. Effective Date.
This ordinance is adopted under the provisions of the Municipal Code of the City ofChula Vista
and shall become effective thirty days after its adoption.
Presented by Approved as to fonn by
CÁ.. ):k~ 'D~ 7. I~ "',£.
Chris Salomone John M. Kaheny
Community Deve1opment Director City Attorney
J:\COMMDEVlRESOSIOutdoor Storage Ordinance (Reguiar)
d.-~~
PAGE 1, ITEM NO.: ~
MEETING DATE: 09/10/02
JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY / CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION APPROVING AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTATION
AGREEMENT WITH BARONE-GALASSO AND ASSOCIATES AND THE
OLSON COMPANY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE "E" STREET
TRANSIT -ORIENTED-DEVELOPMENT (TOD) PROJECT PROPOSAL
LOCATED AT AND ADJACENT TO 707 "F" STREET (OLD CITY
CORPORATION YARD SITE), DEEMING WAIVED CERTAIN OWNER
PARTICIPATION RIGHTS AND DIRECTING STAFF AND DEVELOPER
TO WORK WITH DESIGNATED PROSPECTIVE OWNER-
PARTICIPANTS
SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR l1\~~
REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR cq,~v¡V
.,
4/5THS VOTE: YES [=:J NO ŒJ
BACKGROUND
Redevelopment Agency staff have been in discussions with several prominent urban development
entities during the past year regarding the potential redevelopment of properties located around the
Bayfront - E Street Trolley Station and the City's vacant old corporation yard property (Exhibit A) An
initial concept pion has been drafted by Barone - Golasso and Associates and The Olson Company
to develop a transit-oriented project on the super block bounded by the trolley line, F Street,
Woodlawn Avenue and E Street. The proposal includes approximately 350 for-sale and rental
residential units, 40,000 square feet of commercial development, and a new park and ride parking
structure (Exhibit B.)
The proposed Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) (attached as Exhibit C) will cover negotiations
on City-owned property at 707 F Street and privately owned properties located along Woodlawn
Avenue and E Street. A separate negotiation agreement will be considered between the
development entities and the Metropolitan Transportation Development Board (MTDB) for
coordinated redevelopment of MTDB-owned property adjacent to the trolley station. Owner
participation rights have been extended to the private property owners within the proposed
development. In addition, MTDB staff and Board have had a preliminary look at the project and
MTDB staff are supportive of the transit village concept.
Staff is recommending entering into the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Barone-Galasso and
Associates and The Olson Company based on the quality of the development proposal, the
development reputation of the parties involved, and the rare opportunity to create a master-planned
transit village at one of the City's most important gateways.
..3-1
PAGE 2, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 09/10/02
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Resolution opproving an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with Barone-Galasso and
Associates and The Olson Company for development of the "E" Street Transit-Oriented-
Development (TOO) Project located at and adjacent to 707 "F" Street (Old Corporation Yard
Site.)
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
DISCUSSION
The site of the proposed development adjacent to the Bayfront - E Street Trolley station has
excited development interest for some time. With the vacation of the City's old corporation yard,
redevelopment of the area has become more feasible. The discussion below details the setting,
the concept proposal and benefits of the development, as well as a summary of project
processing and development timing.
Project Site
The development site includes approximotely 13.45 developable acres, of which 9.3 acres is the
subject of this Exclusive Negotiation Agreement and the remainder is subject to a separate
negotiation agreement between the development entities and the Metropolitan Transit
Development Board (MTDB.) For purposes of this report, the discussion will focus on both City
and MTDB portions of the development proposal.
The existing project site includes the City's old corporation yard with 5.98 acres located at 707
"F" Street. The remainder of the properties under this ENA includes five privately held parcels
totaling 3.32 acres. The project site is completely developed as follows: 1) maintenance yard
facilities, a city fueling facility, and open storage, on City-owned property at 707 "F" Street; 2) a
private office building at 240 Woodlawn Avenue; 3) an all-suites hotel located at 230 Woodlawn
Avenue; 4) a restaurant located at 700 "E" Street; and 5) a motel located at 710 "E" Street. The
MTDB-owned property includes a park and ride facility, a City-owned and Chamber-managed
City Visitor Center, and the trolley station.
The project site is bounded by the trolley line and the 1-5 freeway on the west, commercial
development on the north across "E" Street, commercial and multi-family residential development
on the east across Woodlawn Avenue, and commercial and industrial development on the south
across "F" Street. The project site is also adjacent to the proposed Bayfront Village development
across the 1-5 freeway to the west.
The project site is flat to very gently sloping to the west, with the 1-5 freeway submerged below
grade and the trolley line at grade. The City corporation yard property and adjoining private
properties will be assessed for hazardous contamination during the negotiation period.
.,3-;l..
PAGE 3, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 09/10/02
Disposition of the City fueling facility will also be addressed during the negotiation period.
Options include a new facility at the existing Civic Center compus and possible shared use of the
County's fueling facility on Garrett Street.
Project Proposal
The concept proposal is still at an early stage of development and will be further defined during
the negotiafion period leading up to adoption of a Disposition and Development Agreement
(DDA). However, the parameters of the development concept are based on the principles of
"smart growth" with higher density residential and support commercial close to existing mass
transit facilities. The proposal will create a transit village that serves the City, the neighborhood,
and the regional user. The concept plan expands on the site's existing opportunities, which
include the trolley station, easy freeway access, City "gateway" potential, proximity to the Bayfront
Village proposal and redevelopment of the Port fidelonds, adjacencies with the Chula Vista
Nature Center and with the Broadway commercial corridor and Downtown Chula Vista. The
project is envisioned as a catalyst to further revitalization of the surrounding neighborhoods and
commerciol areas.
Elements of a successful transit village are being incorporated into the project design. These
include creation of a high-quality compact residential neighborhood with streets and alleys, a
mixture of uses that support the neighborhood, open plow spaces serviced by the trolley line,
shopkeeper units and traditional retail, a day care center, a new City Visitor Center (subject to
discussions with the Chamber of Commerce), a new very visible entry point to the City ("E" Street
being the most frequenfed entry point between downtown San Diego/lindbergh Field and the
City Of Chula Vista), and a circulation system fhat creates a pleasant pedestrian walking
experience. The project will also need to continue to serve as a major park and ride facility for
the tralley station.
The concept proposal at present includes a variety of residential and commercial elements. The
residential components include: 1) approximately 175 for-sale units, including three story
town homes, live-work lofts, and flats; and 2) approximately 175 rental units, primarily in a five
story apartment strucfure. Commercial components include: 1) a four-level business-class hotel
with 100- 120 rooms; 2) several restaurants, including a restaurant at the trolley stafion and a
restaurant at Woodlawn and "E" Street; 3) neighborhood support commercial; 4) a child care
facility; and 5) a new City Visitor Center.
A comprehensive urban planning effort will be proposed as a component of the project submittal.
Streetscape improvements will be coordinated by Estrada Land Planning, while other elements of
the E Street entryway (architecfure and urban design) will be assessed by the CityWorks team at
the same time that they prepare a Specific Plan for the project submittal. CityWorks includes
professionals from Warner Architecture + Design and Collaborative Services, and will be assisted
by former City of San Diego Architect Michael Stepner.
J-3
PAGE 4, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 09/10/02
Potential Proiect Benefits
This project has the potential to significantly re-shape perceptions of Chula Vista's main goteway
into the City. Over a million trolley riders annually pass by the site. A master-planned urban
transit village, with exciting architecture and amenities, should provide significant positive
impressions for visitors and have a very positive effect on overall revitalization in northwest Chula
Vista.
The project proposal should boost property tax revenues, sales tax and transit occupancy tax for
the City. The overall project investment is estimated to be approximately $ 70 million. Spin-off
benefits cauld be tremendous, including renovated or new commercial along "E" Street and
renovated or new infill housing along Woodlown Avenue, "F" Street and surrounding areas.
Redevelopment of the area will also increase the desirability of the adjacent Bayfront Village
development proposal.
Project Processina
The project is located within the Town Centre II Redevelopment Project Area, with the exception of
the private parcels, which are in the adjoining Survey Area and are slated to be included within
the Project Area in the coming months. As such, the project entitlements will be processed
through the Community Development Department's Planning and Environmental Services
Division. The project is not within the jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission. The
primary project entitlement will be a Specific Plan, which will set forth the project's design,
landscape, circulation, and other features.
Development Timeframe
The specific development timeframe will be further refined during the negotiation period set forth
in the ENA. The negotiation phase is for a period of one year, during which project timing and
phasing will be set forth. It is the developer's hope to be able to move forward with the project at
the earliesf possible time, dependent upon the pace of project entitlement review, relocation of
the City's fueling facility, and any necessary site remediation. Given these uncertainties, the
development will likely be developed in two or three phases. The City has hoped for inclusion of
the trolley station parcel within the first phase and that is still planned for. However, with
acquisition of the park and ride site by MTDB (formerly owned by the County) and MTDB
requiring a separate negotiation and development agreement with the developer, it is difficult at
this point to determine the precise timing of development. Nonetheless, construction could begin
soon after receipt of discretionary entitlements and building permits (as well as similar approvals
from MTDB), perhaps as soon as late Summer, 2003. Completion of the first phase would occur
in late Spring, 2004. Staff will return to Council with an interim report on progress and phasing
during the negotiation phase as timing becomes clearer.
..3-4
PAGE 5, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 09/10/02
Owner Participation
The four private property owners within the proposed project area were invited to submit
responses as potential owner-participants in accordance with Redevelopment Law and the Town
Centre II Owner Participation Rules. Two property owners did not express an interest in
participating in the project, even after follow-up. By approval of the proposed resolution, the
Agency shall deem waived and extinguished these property owner's participation rights. Two
other owners responded formally. The owners of the Aunt Emmas Restaurant property have
indicated a desire for the Agency to provide the benefits of "friendly condemnation" if the property
is purchased for redevelopment purposes. The restaurant operator has indicated an interest in
continuing os the operator of the project restaurant. The owners of the Best Western and
Travelers Suites properties have requested participation as either hotel owner-operators or as
operators. The specific parameters of owner participation will be finalized during the exclusive
negotiation period.
Exclusive Neaotiation Aareement
The Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) sets forth the framework for project negotiations with
Barone-Galasso and Associates and The Olson Company, but does not commit the Agency to
any project approvals or property sales. The ENA will run for a period of one year with an
additional six month extension at the discretion of the Executive Director. The ENA will cover the
City and Third Party parcels covering approximately three quarters of the site. A separate
negotiation agreement (or some equivalent arrangement) will be entered into between MTDB and
the development team for that portion of the site owned by MTDB.
The ENA sets forth a number of negotiation milestones affecting the Agency and the Developer.
Within ten days of approval of the ENA, an ENA deposit of $50,000 will be collected to conduct
project analysis. Other significant milestones include:
Within 90 Days . Progress Report with refined Project description and revised concept
plan
Within 150 Days . Preliminary Master Plan and Phasing Plan
. Feasibility Study for Park & Ride facility
. Report on status of neç¡otiations with Third Party Parcel owners
Within 180 Days . Project Feasibility Analysis, including economic pro-forma,
preliminary proposed acquisition financing, preliminary proposed
sources of initial phase financinç¡, and market study for the Project
The Agency will be responsible for coordination of the CEQA and planning process for the Project
(with environmental review costs at the Developer's expense.) Agency will also coordinate
discussions with MTDB concerning their portion of the development, as well as discussions
concerning infrastructure and public improvements. Developer has indicated a desire to process
entitlements concurrently with negotiations, with the Disposition and Development Agreement
and entitlements approved at the same time. Please note that Agency staff will be assessing a
"shared cost" arrangement for off-site planning of the "E" Street entry corridor to be prepared by
.,.3- S
PAGE 6, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 09/10/02
CityWorks that will help integrate the transit village concept with the other land uses on "E" Street
between 1-5 and Braadway.
It is envisioned in the ENA that the Agency will transfer it's property in an "AS IS" conditian. To
assist Developer with its hazardous materials analysis, the Agency will cause to be prepared a
"Phase I" initial environmental analysis of hazardous materials conditions on the corporate yard
site, as well as an the private parcels. Any further analysis required would be done at Developer's
expense. An RFP to conduct this preliminary analysis has been prepared and circulated. It is
staff's current understanding that the old corporation yard property is in a "clean" condition at
present. The condition of other properties is unknown at this time.
With respect to the acquisition of properties, the ENA requires that the Developer will make good
faith best efforts to acquire properties voluntarily. Agency retains full discretion as to the use, if
any, of eminent domain if Developer's efforts fail.
CEQA Compliance
Since the ENA requires only negotiations, and creates no significant environmental impacts,
Agency/City opproval qualifies for an exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3).
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact with approval of the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement. The
Agency will cause to be prepared a preliminary environmental assessment (Phase I) of Agency
and privately held properties within the scope of the Project. The Agency may also participate in
a "shared cost" planning effort with respect to the project site and the "E" Street entryway
between 1-5 and Broadway. These contract(s) will have as yet undetermined costs to be funded
from Town Centre II (Merged Project Area) funds.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A - Properties Map
Exhibit B - Concept Site Plan
J: \COMMDEV\ST AFF.REP\O9- 1 0-O2\ESTREETTODENAdoc
..3-C:.
RESOLUTION NO.
JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT WITH
BARON E-GALASSO AND ASSOCIATES AND THE OLSON
COMPANY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE "E" STREET TRANSIT-
ORIENTED-DEVELOPMENT (TO D) PROJECT PROPOSAL lOCATED
AT AND ADJACENT TO 707 "F" STREET (OLD CITY CORPORATION
YARD SITE), DEEMING WAIVED CERTAIN OWNER PARTICIPATION
RIGHTS AND DIRECTLY STAFF AND DEVELOPER TO WORK WITH
DESIGNATED PROSPECTIVE OWNER-PARTICIPANTS
WHEREAS, representatives of Barone-Galasso & Associates and The Olson Company
("Developer") are proposing to develop the "E" Street Transit-Oriented-Development with a high
quality mixed use project comprised of for-sale and rental residential units, neighborhood and visitor
commercial spaces, a hotel, restaurants, a day care center and a City Visitor Center; and
WHEREAS. the proposed project area is comprised of approximately 13.45 developable
acres with 8 parcels, including 1 parcel owned by the City, 5 parcels owned by private parties. and 2
parcels owned by the Metropolitan Transportation Development Board (not a part of this ENA) within
the City of Chula Vista adjacent to the "E" Street-8ayfront Trolley Station; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with
the Agency for one year, with an option for a six-month extension. in order to develop plans, pursue
entitlements, secure financing, and negotiate a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) on
the terms set forth therein; and
WHEREAS, the Agency is willing to enter into an ENA due to the high quality of the proposal
and its potential to eliminate blighting conditions in the Town Centre II Redevelopment Project Area
by serving as a catalyst for quality development and revitalization at a key City entryway; and
WHEREAS, the approval of the ENA is exempt from CEQA under CEQA Guidelines Section
15061(b)(3); and
WHEREAS, the ENA, in compliance with State law, provides for the extension of owner
participation rights to all property owners and tenants which are party to the ENA.
WHEREAS, the Agency has extended owner participation rights as required by law. with
certain property owners responding, and others not.
NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approve the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement subject to owner participation rights
with Barone-Galasso and Associates and The Olson Company for development of the "E" Street
Transit-Oriented-Development (TOD) proposal located at and adjacent to 707 "F" Street (Old City
Corporation Yard Site).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Agency finds and determines that owner participation
rights have been extended to prospective owner-participants as required by law.
~-7
(a) AT&T Wireless and VP Import/Export have failed to exercise their owner
participation rights within the required timeframes and such rights are hereby deemed waived and
extinguished;
(b) Aunt Emma's, Best Western and Travelers Suites have indicated an interest in
participating in the proposed Project. Agency staff and Developer are authorized and directed to
negotiate with such parties as more particularly described in the ENA
PRESENTED BY APPROVED AS TO FORM BY
Chris Salomone
Director of Community Development
J: \COM MD EVIRE SOS\E NAReso E Street TOO .doc
...s - ff
EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT
[E Street TOD Project]
This EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into effective as of
September 10, 2002, ("Effective Date") by and between the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a political subdivision of the State of California ("Agency"), and THE CITY
OF CHUlA VISTA, a municipal corporation ("City") (collectively, "City/Agency"), on the one hand
and BARONE GALASSO AND ASSOCIATES, INC., a Delaware Corporation ("BGA") and THE
OLSON COMPANY, INC. a Delaware Corporation ("Olson") (collectively "Deveioper") on the other
hand, with reference to the following facts:
A. Developer is proposing the development of a mixed use real estate project as more
particularly described in Section 2.2 hereof ("Project"), upon certain real property comprised of
approximately 9.30 acres of, collectively, City Parcels and Private Parcels las those terms are
defined below) consisting of unimproved and improved real property located within the City of
Chula Vista, California, as more particularly described in Section 2.1 hereof ("Property").
B. City owns certain parcels comprising approximateiy 5.98 acres representing the
southern portion of the Property ("City Parcels"). The northern portion of the site is owned by
various public and private entities.
C. In order to facilitate the development of the Project on the Property, Developer and
CitylAgency desire to enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement.
D. Due to the high quality nature of the Project, and its potential for eliminating
blighting conditions on and around the Property, CitylAgency is willing to enter into such an
arrangement on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, the mutual covenants contained
herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereby acknowledge as satisfactory,
AGENCY AND DEVELOPER HEREBY AGREE AS FOllOWS:
1. NATURE OF AGREEMENT.
1.1 In General. The general purposes of this Agreement are to facilitate the processing
of land use entitlements and environmental impact analysis for the Project; and to establish an
exclusive negotiation period during which the parties agree to attempt, in good faith: (a) to further
define the Project; (b) to determine Project feasibility and marketability; (c) to determine the extent
to which implementation of the Project will result in public benefit; (d) to determine the extent to
which the various parcels herein described are necessary for the Project; (e) to determine the
amount, if any, of warranted CitylAgency participation in the Project, and If) in the event the
parties are mutually satisfied with the outcomes of the matters described in (a) through (e) above,
to negotiate the terms and conditions of a Disposition and Development Agreement ("DDA"),
which, subject to the terms of this Agreement, at City/Agency's sole discretion, shall be presented
to the Agency Board/City Council for their consideration. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
CitylAgency each reserves the right to approve or reject a DDA, the Project, or any disposition of
the City Parcel, as more particularly set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement, below.
1.2 Exclusivitv. During the term of the Agreement, CitylAgency agrees not to solicit
alternative development proposals for the Property, or to negotiate with any other person or entity
regarding the acquisition and development of the Property, For purposes of this Section,
"negotiate" shall mean to conduct communications or conferences of any kind with a view to
J,\COMMOEV\Estes\TClI\old corp yard\ENA E STREET TOO FINAL-doc Page 1 of 18
..ß- 9
reaching a preliminary or final settlement or agreement with respect to the disposition or
development of all or any portion of the Property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer
acknowledges that (a) City/Agency may receive from time to time, unsolicited alternative proposals
for the development of the Property, and Ibl City/Agency reserves the right to conduct a preliminary
evaluation and factor in alternative proposals when considering whether or not to approve, andlor
the terms and conditions upon which to approve, final agreements with Developer for the actual
disposition and developmen( of the Property. City/Agency shall endeavor to notify Developer within
ten days after receiving an unsolicited alternative development proposal for all or any portion of the
Property. In the event an unsolicited proposal is received Developer reserves the right to submit an
alternative proposal to match or improve upon the terms and conditions of the unsolicited
alternative. To the extent any non-City/Agency owned parcells) are included as part of the Project,
however, City/Agency reserves the right to extend owner participation rights to the owner(sl of
such parcells) and to consider owner participation deveiopment proposals in accordance with the
adopted Redevelopment Plan for the Town Centre II Project Area. To the extent an alternative
owner participation proposal is accepted by the CitylAgency, this Agreement shall terminate with
respect to the affected parcels owned by the third-party owner-participant(s).
1.3 Term. The initial term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and
terminate one year after the Effective Date on September 10, 2003, unless earlier terminated in
accordance with the provisions hereof (the "Initial Negotiation Period"). At the end of the Initial
Negotiation Period, the City Manager/Executive Director, in his sole discretion, on behalf of the
City/Agency, is authorized to extend the term of this Agreement for up to an additional 180 days
(the "Extended Negotiation Period") provided that at the end of the Initiai Negotiation Period, the
City/Agency has not exercised its right to terminate as herein provided, the Developer is in full
compliance with all terms and conditions hereof, the Developer concurs with such extension of the
negotiation period, and the City Manager/Executive Director has determined that there is a
reasonable likelihood that the Developer will agree to terms and conditions for the disposition of the
parcels of the Property required for the development of the Project that City/Agency staff will be
able to recommend to City/Agency prior to the expiration of the Extended Negotiation Period.
[Remainder of Page Intentionally Blank}
J:\COMMDEV\Estes\Agency General\ENA E STREET TOD FINAL.doc Page 2 of 18
...J -to
2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND PROJECT.
2.1 Propertv Description. Unless additions or deletions are approved or required by
CitylAgency, for purposes of this Agreement, the parcels comprising the Property, and each
parcel's approximate acreage shall be as follows:
2.1.1 Parcels Owned by Private Parties (collectively, the "Third Party Parcels"):
1. Common Name: Best Western Parcel
San Diego County Tax APN: 567-031-1700
Current Ownership: Bhakta & Bhakta
Acreage: 1.87
2. Common Name: Aunt Emma's Parcel
San Diego County Tax APN: 567-031-0600
Current Ownership: Morgan & Hawken
Acreage: .34
3. Common Name: Cell Site Parcel
San Diego County Tax APN: 567-031-2900
Current Ownership: AT&T Wireless
Acreage: .01
4. Common Name: Travelers Suites Parcel
San Diego County Tax APN: 567-031-2800
Current Ownership: John M. Sacks, Inc.
Acreage: .53
5. Common Name: Office 8ldg. Parcel
San Diego County Tax APN: 567-031-1100
Current Ownership: VP ImportlExport
Acreage: .57
2.1.2 Parcels Owned by City ("City Parcei")
1. Common Name: Oid Corporation Yard Parcel
San Diego County Tax APN: 567-031-2700
Current Ownership: City of Chula Vista
Acreage: 5.98
2.1.3. The Metropolitan Transit Development Board ("MTDB") andlor San Diego
Arizona & Eastern Railway (SDA&E) currently own certain improved real property located near or
adjacent to the Third Party Parcels and the City Parcel (the "MTDB Parcels"). The MTDB Parcels
are comprised of approximately 4.73 acres with the following APN designations: 567-031-2200
and 567-031-2600. Developer and CitylAgency desire to include the MTDB Parcels as part of
the Project. However, Developer must first obtain approval from MTDB for a separate Exclusive
Negotiating Agreement and, if negotiations are successful, a Disposition and Development
Agreement. Developer acknowledges and agrees that only leasehold interests may be obtained in
the MTDB approval. Upon approval by MTDB in its sole discretion, and subject to any terms and
conditions specified thereby, the MTDB Parcels shall also be included in the Property,
J:ICOMMOEVIEstesIAgency GenerallENA E STREET TOO FINAL.doc Page30f18
....3 - I {
2.1.4 A map showing the parcels comprising the Property is attached hereto as
Exhibit A.
2.1.5 Developer may explore acquisition of one or more improved parcels located
adjacent to the Property if necessary or appropriate for the development of the Project.
Upon written approval of the City Manager/Executive Oirector and the waiver or exhaustion
of applicable owner-participation rights, such parcells) may be added to the Property.
2.2 Proiect Description. Unless otherwise approved or required by CitylAgency, the
Project will include approximately 350 residential units with approximately 175 of those units for
rent and 175 units for sale. A portion of the rental units will be available for low- and moderate-
income households. Approximately 40,000 sq. ft. of retaillcommercial will be developed aiong E
Street and at other appropriate locations within the development. Hospitality uses may be
developed or re-developed on site. Subject to MTDB approval, if the MTDB Parcels are included in
the Project, the existing trolley station will be improved and parking for the County Park and Ride
lot will be provided in a parking structure. The specific land uses will be further refined based upon
a detailed market study, site plans, and requirements of government entities, including MTDB and
the City.
A preliminary concept plan for the Project is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Agency/City and
Developer acknowledge that this plan is schematic and subject to change as the Project definition is
refined. Developer acknowledges and agrees that Agency may require or impose additional material
obligations on the Project either in the negotiation of a DDA, or in the entitlements process. If
Developer does not agree to any such condition, Developer reserves the right to terminate this
Agreement and not to proceed with the Project. The City Manager/Executive Director may require
or approve minor modifications to the proposed Project during the term hereof; material
modifications to the Project must be approved by the City Council/Agency Board.
3. DUTIES DURING NEGOTIATION PERIOD.
3.1 Developer's Obliaations.
3.1.1 Immediately upon approval of this Agreement, Developer shall (a) meet and
confer with CitylAgency staff to develop a mutually agreeable negotiation
and development schedule, and to agree upon the required forms of Project
plans, pro forma, marketing and feasibility studies, and evidence of financing
that are required by the CitylAgency per the milestones set forth below; and
(b) commence good faith negotiations with City/Agency designated
prospective owner participants in the Project; and (c) commence good faith
negotiations with Agency and MTDB regarding the inclusion of the MTDB
Parcels in the proposed Project.
3.1.2 Within ten (10) days after the Effective Date, Developer shall deposit with
City/Agency $50,000 in immediately available funds (the "ENA Deposit") to
be utilized by City/Agency to conduct the Project analysis described in
Section 3.2(a)-(i) hereof. Concurrently, City/Agency shall provide Developer
with a preliminary budget for City/Agency's completion of such analysis,
City/Agency shall have the right to draw down on the ENA deposit as
necessary to pay third party consultants, City staff time (at applicable full
cost recovery rates), and other reasonable costs incurred by the City/Agency
in conducting such analysis, City/Agency shall provide Developer with
J:ICOMMOEVIEstesIAgency GenerallENA E STREET TOO FINAL.doc Page 4 of 18
J -I a...
quarterly reports that contain a description of the analysis accomplished and
the amount of the draws that occurred during the quarter. City/Agency shall
request additional deposits if the initial deposit is exhausted and further
analysis is required. Expenditures exceeding, or outside the scope of, the
City/Agency's initial budget shall be subject to Developer's reasonable
approval. Any deposit balance remaining upon the termination of the
Agreement shall be returned to Developer. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
the City/Agency shall be responsible for Community Development staff time,
City Attorney's office staff time and CitylAgency outside legal counsel fees
for DDA negotiations. MTDB has indicated it shall require a deposit for its
costs under an ENA; such costs shall be Developer's sole responsibility.
3.1.3 Within (90) days after the Effective Date Developer shall provide
City/Agency with a progress report and information including: (a)
refinements to the Project description; (b) revised concept plan interim
drafts; and (c) status updates on information required below in Sections
3.1.4 and 3.1.5.
3.1.4. Within 150 days after the Effective Date, Developer shall provide
City/Agency with:
(a) a preliminary Master and Phasing Plan for the Project including a site
plan, conceptual elevations, landscape plan, unit mix, project
identification and graphics;
(b) feasibility study for the Project's proposed park & ride facility; and
(c) a report on the status of negotiations with owners of Third Party
Parcels that City/Agency has designated as prospective owner
participants in the Project and with MTDB.
Such items may exciude any portions of the Property subject to
owner participation agreements with City/Agency, or determined by
the City/Agency and Developer to be excluded from the Property.
3.1.5 Within 180 days after the Effective Date, Developer shall provide
City/Agency with the following information, which, together demonstrate
the feasibility of each of the Project components:
(a) requested economic data including, but not limited to, project costs,
revenues and cash flow analysis for each component of the Project
and each Project phase;
(b) preliminary proposed sources of acquisition financing for the Project;
(c) preliminary proposed sources for the development of the Project's
initial phase; and
(d) a market study demonstrating adequate demand for residential units
at various price points and product types, and the projected
demographics of projected purchasers and renters.
J:\COMMOEV\Estes\Agency General\ENA E STREET TOo FINAL.doc Page 5 of 18
~ -/:3
With respect to information provided by Developer that is marked
"confidential", the provisions of Section 6.7 hereof shall apply.
3.1.6 Throughout the Negotiation Period, the Developer shall make periodic oral
and written progress reports to CitylAgency on all matters requested
thereby. As City/Agency deems reasonably necessary or appropriate,
presentations may be requested at public forums to solicit input from
citizens, businesses, stakeholders and relevant interest groups.
3.2 Aqencv Obliqations.
a. City/Agency shall coordinate the CEQA process and prepare, or cause the
preparation of all required CEQA documents at Developer's cost as more
particularly provided in Section 3.3.2, below.
b. Upon receipt from Developer of necessary Project financial and other
information, City/Agency shall expeditiously endeavor to determine the
necessity for, as well as legal and financial feasibility of the transfer of the
City Parcel and other parcels described in 2,1.1 to the Developer.
c. City/Agency shall work with Developer to cause the preparation of
preliminary title reports IPTRs) for the Property within 15 days after the
Effective Date of the Agreement. The PTR's shall be issued by First
American Title Company, or another title company mutually satisfactory to
the parties.
d. City/Agency shall work with the Developer to determine all on-site and off-
site public improvements (both traffic and non-traffic) necessary for the
development of the Project. To the extent reasonably available at little or no
cost, CitylAgency shall provide Developer with copies of any existing "as
built" drawings for improvements located on the City Parcel andlor public
utilities serving the Property.
e. City/Agency shall provide Developer an estimate of all governmental fees,
charges and other exactions required to implement the Project
f. City/Agency shall assess the need for a public facilities financing plan and
provide an estimate of any such costs to be borne by Developer (if any)
g. City/Agency staff shall meet with representatives of the Developer to
provide information on required traffic improvements and site design issues
and costs.
h. City/Agency shall coordinate discussions with MTDB with respect to the
integration of the MTDB Parcels into the Project. City/Agency and
Developer shall exercise their mutual best efforts to obtain a preliminary
agreement with the MTDB on the terms and conditions for such integration
by 180 days after the Effective Date.
i. Agency shall cooperate with Deveioper's negotiations with Agency
designated prospective owner-participants. In the event that Developer's
negotiations with prospective participants are not successful, Agency shall
J:ICOMMOEVIEstesIAgency GenerallENA E STREET TOO FINAL.doc Page 6 of 18
...fj -I .¡
solicit specific owner participant proposals and promptly proceed to approve
or reject same in accordance with Section 1.2 above and the Agency's
owner participation rules.
3.3 Entitlement Processinq
3.3.1 Developer is authorized to submit an application for land use entitlements
with respect to the development of the Property with the Project.
City/Agency shall process Developer's application in accordance with
existing CitylAgency policies. The entitlement process will address all
applicabie iand use issues including, without limitation, affordable housing
requirements, schools, parks, transit, public facilitylopen space financing,
sensitive habitat, etc. In addition to the monies for Project analysis required
under Section 3.1.2, above, Deveioper shall be 'responsible for payment of
all standard City entitlement processing fees as and when incurred in
accordance with City requirements,
3.3.2 It shall be the responsibility of the Developer, after early consultation with
the Agency as the lead agency, to fund the preparation and legal review, if
necessary, of appropriate environmental document(s) that will analyze the
environmental impacts of the Project in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act ICEQA) and all of its provisions. The Developer
shall initiate early coordination with the City/Agency, and any other
appropriate agencies, in order to determine the type of environmental
document required, the scope of the document, the level of analysis, and
related environmental requirements. Any contract for CEQA consultant
services shall be substantially in the form of the City's standard three-party
agreement. Developer shall provide all necessary information, funds and
agreements necessary to complete the required CEQA process for the
Project prior to or concurrent with any proposed adoption of a DDA or
entitlements for the Project.
3.4 Terms and Conditions for a DDA
Upon CitylAgency staff's preliminary approval of Project concept plans, feasibility,
marketability and public benefit, City/Agency staff and Developer shall in good faith attempt to
negotiate the terms and conditions of an agreement (" Disposition and Development Agreement", or
alternatively "DDA"). If the terms of a DDA can be negotiated at a staff level, CitylAgency staff
shall present same to the City CouncillAgency Board for its review and consideration. Any
negotiated DDA shall, contain substantially the following terms, plus others to be negotiated by the
parties.
a. Disposition of the Citv Owned Parcels.
The CitylAgency shall convey to Developer those parcels of the City
Parcel, determined to be necessary for the Project, and the Developer shall
acquire such property on such terms as may be agreed upon by the parties.
The City Parcel and any other CitylAgency acquired parcels shall be
transferred in an "AS IS" condition with limited representations and
warranties as to its physical condition or its suitability for Developer's
intended use. Responsibility for environmental conditions arising before and
after transfer shall be negotiated. Agency will agree to provide Developer
J:ICOMMPEVIEstesl)l,gency GenerallENA E STREET TOP FINAL.doc Page 7 of 18
J-IS'
with all information in its possession regarding the physical condition of the
Property. The purchase price, rental andlor other consideration will be based
upon such factors as market conditions, scope of deveiopment, cost of
development, cost of environmental remediation (if any), risks incurred,
estimated or actual profit, estimated or actual rates and charges for the
facilities to be developed, public purpose, and other matters relevant to
establishing the fair market value for the uses permitted to be developed
thereon.
b. Aqencv Acquisition of Propertv.
The Developer shall own or acquire control of all parcels comprising
the Property, in such a way and at such times as to permit the development
of the Project. In the event after good faith best efforts, Developer has been
unable to acquire one or more parcels necessary for the development of the
Project, the Agency, to the extent allowed by law, after exercising its own
best efforts to voluntarily acquire such parcels, may agree to schedule and
deliberate upon the acquisition of all or some of the non-City/Agency owned
parcels in the Property by the exercise of eminent domain. Nothing herein
shall obligate the Agency to exercise eminent domain except as it deems
consistent with the public interest and the requirements of the law. Agency
shall retain full discretion to reject the use of eminent domain as it deems
appropriate and consistent with the public interest.
c. Development of the Proiect.
The Developer shall develop the Property with the Project, or a
reasonably similar variant of the Project as approved by the Agency
BoardlCity Council in accordance with an agreed upon schedule.
d. Securitv for Developer's Performance.
Deveioper shall provide security for its performance under the DDA.
Security measures may include one or more of the following: (1) a
conveyance of a conditionally defeasible fee title with right of reverter; (2) a
performance trust deed; andlor (3) guarantees, bonds, letters of credit, cash
deposits or other similar instruments. Any such measures shall take into
consideration any Project lender's need to be secured and, prior to Agency's
exercise of its enforcement rights, shall give such lender adequate notice
and an opportunity to cure any Developer defaults.
e. Economic Risk.
Except as expressly agreed by CityAgency, Developer shall absorb
all economic risks and costs associated with the acquisition of the Property
and the completion of the Project and Developer shall pay the full cost of all
improvements to be constructed on the Property and any required public off-
site improvements including the cost of all normal City fees and permits
applicable to completion of the proposed improvements.
J:\COMMOEV\Estes\Agency Gene'al\ENA E STREET TOO FINAL.doc Page 8 of 18
...;j - f ("
f. Approval Riqhts.
Agency, and other public agencies with jurisdiction, shall have
reasonable approval rights over the construction and permanent lenders for
the Project to ensure their quality and ability to fund the project, and over
major users and tenants of public and commercial Project components.
Specific standards and the process for obtaining Agency approval shall be
negotiated by the parties.
g. Restrictions Aqainst Discrimination.
The DDA shall contain the constraints against discrimination in the
form and manner required by state redevelopment law,
h. Assiqnment.
Under specified circumstances, Developer may assign its rights and
obligations under the DDA provided, however, Developer shall first obtain
Agency approval. Specific standards and the process for obtaining Agency
approval shall be negotiated by the parties.
i. Indemnity.
Developer shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless
CitylAgency, its elected officials, employees and agents against (a) any and
all challengers to the DDA, the Project, or the related entitlements, and (b)
any losses, damages, liabilities, costs (including attorneys fees or court
costs) or claims therefore arising, directly or indirectly, from actions, errors
or omissions of Developer, Developer's employee's or agents in connection
with Developer's processing, development, financing, transfer or operation
of the Project, except to the extent caused by CitylAgency's sole
negligence or sole willful misconduct and to the extent of hazardous
materials liability expressly assumed by City or Agency pursuant to Section
3.4.a. Developer's obligation under this Section shall survive the termination
of the DDA.
j. Restrictions on Speculation and Excess Profit Takinq.
In accordance with California Health and Safety Code Section
33437, the DDA shall include appropriate covenants and restrictions to be
negotiated by the parties to prevent speculation or excess profit taking.
k. Covenants and Restrictions.
The parties shall negotiate appropriate covenants and restrictions
designed to assure the long-term existence and success of the Project.
3.4.1 No Pre-Commitment.
The inclusion of the basic DDA terms set forth above shall not be deemed to be
acceptance of such items by either party until such time as both parties approve, and then
execute a DDA.
J,ICOMMDEVIEstesIAgency Gene<aIIENA E STREET TOD FINAL.doc Page 9 of 18
...?_/7
3.4.2 Rioht to Neootiate for Cost Subsidv.
Developer reserves the right to request City/Agency consideration of a
Project subsidy or other form of participation to the extent necessary for the redevelopment
of the Property with the Project. City/Agency reserves the right to approve or disapprove
such a request in its sole discretion in accordance with applicable redevelopment laws.
4. RETENTION OF DISCRETION TO APPROVE THE PROJECT AND DDA
This Agreement contemplates that the Project and a DDA providing for its implementation
may be presented to the City Council/Agency Board for approval. The Parties understand that
City/Agency is reserving the right to exercise its discretion as to all matters which it is, by law,
entitled or required to exercise its discretion, including, but not limited to the following:
4.1 Approval bv the Aoencv of the final Proiect as contained in the DDA. The parties
understand that CitylAgency has the complete and unfettered discretion to reject a DDA without
explanation or cause. The risk of loss of all processing, design and developmental costs incurred by
the Developer prior to DDA approval shall be absorbed entirely by Developer except unless
expressly assumed, by the terms of this Agreement.
4.2 Review and approval bv Citv/Aoencv of all discretionarv findinos and conclusions.
The duty of the City/Agency to dispose of the City Parcei or other City/Agency acquired parcels
shall be conditioned upon the successful review and approval of all necessary findings and
conclusions which the City Council/Agency Board is required to make, including all necessary
findings and determinations required under CEQA, state and local land use provisions and the
California Community Redevelopment Law. As to any matter which City/Agency may be required
to exercise its unfettered discretion in advancing the Project to completion, nothing herein, nor to
be contained in the DDA shall obligate City/Agency to exercise its discretion in any particular
manner, and any exercise of discretion reserved hereunder or required by law, shall not be deemed
to constitute a breach of City/Agency duties under this Agreement.
5. TERMINATION RIGHTS
Notwithstanding the nominal Initial or Extended Negotiating Periods hereinabove set forth,
either party may terminate this Agreement if the other party has materially defaulted in its
obligations herein set forth, and the terminating party has provided defaulting party with written
notification of such determination, and the defaulting party has refused to cure same. The written
notification shall set forth the nature of the actions required to cure such default if curable.
Defaulting party shall have 30 days from the date of the written notification to cure such default. If
such default is not cured within the 30 day, the termination shall be deemed effective. For
purposes of this paragraph, the parties hereby acknowledge that time is of the essence. Each party
shall also have the right to terminate this Agreement in the event that City/Agency or Developer
determines that (a) the Project is infeasible, based on financial or environmental impact
considerations, or not in the public interest; or (b) the parties reach an impasse in their negotiation
of the DDA which cannot be resolved after good faith efforts. Upon termination, City/Agency shall
return any unspent and uncommitted ENA Deposit monies.
J:ICOMMOEVIEstesIAgency GenerallENA E STREET TOO FINAL.doc Page 10 of 18
...3-/~
6. ADDITIONAL TERMS AND OBLIGATIONS
6.1 No Competino Oevelopment.
Developer shall not commence the construction of any parcels comprising the Property
owned or controlled by the Developer until this Agreement has been properly terminated according
to its terms.
6.2 Aqencv Riqht to Acquire Developer Acquired Parcels.
If Developer shall have acquired any parcels adjacent to or part of the Property not owned
by the Developer as of the Effective Date hereof by voluntary acquisition, and this Agreement is
properly terminated without an approved DDA, the Agency shall have the option, notice of exercise
of which is to be given within 120 days after receipt of written notice of termination, to acquire
such parcels for the actual cost incurred by Developer in its acquisition. Such costs shall include,
but not be limited to, third party fees incurred in the acquisition, and a reasonable charge for time
spent on the acquisition by Developer representatives prior to the sale to the Agency in an amount
not-to-exceed $25,000 per parcel acquired by Developer.
6.3 Developer's Findinos, Determinations, Studies, Reports, and Financinq.
As requestèd by City/Agency, from time to time, the Developer agrees to make periodic oral
progress reports and periodic written reports advising City/Agency on all matters and all studies
being made to the extent that they do not include confidentiai matters. All such matters shall be
deemed to be the joint property of City/Agency and Developer, and may be used by either party
without reimbursement to the other. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that City/Agency
enters into an agreement for the redevelopment of the Property within one year after the
termination of this Agreement for a reason other than Developer's default hereunder and such
agreement is with a developer that presented an unsolicited Property development proposal during
the term hereof, Developer shall be entitled to reimbursement of its out-of-pocket costs incurred
with respect to those studies and reports that it provided to the City/Agency and are utilized by the
subsequent developer for development of the Property. Developer shall not warrant or guaranty the
accuracy or completeness of any study or report provided; City/Agency and any third party that
uses such studies and reports does so at their own risk.
6.4 Real Estate Commissions.
Neither City/Agency nor Developer shall be liable for any real estate commission or
brokerage fees which may arise here from. City/Agency and Developer represent that they have
engaged no broker, agent or finder separately in connection with this transaction and each party
agrees to indemnify, hold harmless and defend the other against claims for commissions or fees
made through such party.
6.5 Each Partv to Bear its Own Cost.
Each party shall bear its own costs incurred in connection with the negotiation of a DDA,
and the implementation of this Agreement, except as otherwise expressly provided herein or
expressly agreed in writing.
J:\COMMOEV\Estes\Agency General\ENA E STREET TOO FINAL.doc Page 11 of 18
~-('J
6.6 Confidentialitv.
Oeveioper acknowledges and agrees that CitylAgency is a public entity with a responsibility
and, in many cases, legal obligation to conduct its business in a manner open and available to the
public. Accordingly, any information provided by Developer to City/Agency with respect to the
Property, the Project or Developer may be disclosed to the public either purposely, inadvertently, or
as a result of a public demand or order. With respect to any information provided that Developer
reasonably deems and identifies in writing as proprietary and confidential in nature, Agency agrees
to exercise its best efforts to keep such information confidential. Upon Developer's request,
CitylAgency agrees to negotiate the terms for a Confidentiality Agreement with respect to such
information.
7. NO PRE-COMMITMENT
By its execution of this Agreement, CitylAgency is not committing itself or agreeing to
undertake any activity requiring the subsequent exercise of discretion by City/Agency, or any
department thereof including, but not limited to, the approval and execution of a Disposition and
Development Agreement; the proposal, amendment, or approval of any land use regulation
governing the Property; the provision of financial assistance for the development of any public or
private interest in real property; the authorization or obligation to use the Agency's eminent domain
authority; or, any other such activity.
This Agreement does not constitute a disposition of property or exercise of control over
property by City/Agency and does not require a public hearing. CitylAgency execution of this
Agreement is merely an agreement to enter into a period of exclusive negotiations according to the
terms hereof, reserving final discretion and approval by CityAgency as to any proposed Disposition
and Development Agreement and all proceedings and decisions in connection therewith.
8. GENERAL PROVISIONS
8.1 Address for Notice.
Developer's Address for Notice:
Barone Galasso & Associates, Inc.
710 West Ivy
San Diego, CA 92101
Attn: Michael B. Galasso
Telephone: (619) 232-2100
Fax: (619) 232-2127
The Olson Company
9191 Towne Center Drive, Suite l-101
San Diego, CA 92122
Attn: Tony Pauker
Telephone: (858) 453-7181
Fax: (858) 455-5197
(562) 430-4742
J:ICOMMOEVIEstesIAgency GenerallENA E STREET TOO FINAl.doc Page 12 of 18
...3 ~.;2.0
With a copy to each:
Dan Slater Todd Olson
Rutan & Tucker 3020 Old Ranch Parkway
611 Anton Blvd, 14th Floor Suite 250
Costa Mesa, CA 92626- 1998 Seal Beach, CA 90740-2751
Telephone: (174) 641-5100
Fax: (714) 546-9035
Agency's Address for Notice:
Redeveiopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista
Community Development Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attn: Lyle Haynes, Assistant Community Development Director
Byron Estes, Redevelopment Manager
Telephone: (619) 691-5047
Fax: (619) 476-5310
Copy to: Glen Googins, Assistant City Attorney
8.2 Authoritv.
Each party represents that it has full right, power and authority to execute this Agreement
and to perform its obligations hereunder, without the need for any further action under its governing
instruments, and the parties executing this Agreement on the behalf of such party are duiy
authorized agents with authority to do so.
8.3 Counterparts.
This Agreement may be executed in multiple copies, each of which shall be deemed an
original, but all of which shall constitute one Agreement after each party has signed such a
counterpart.
8.4 Entire Aqreement.
This Agreement together with all exhibits attached hereto and other agreements expressly
referred to herein, constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties with respect to the subject
matter contained herein. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings,
representations, warranties and statements, oral or written, are superseded.
8.5 Further Assurances.
The parties agree to perform such further acts and to execute and deliver such additional
documents and instruments as may be reasonably required in order to carry out the provisions of
this Agreement and the intentions of the parties.
J:\COMMOEV\EstesIAgency GenerallENA E STREET TOO FINAL.doc Page 13 of 18
J-02 /
8.6 No Third Partv Beneficiaries.
There are no other parties to this Agreement, express or implied, direct or indirect.
CitylAgency and Developer acknowledge that it is not their intent to create any third party
beneficiaries to this Agreement.
8.7 Exclusive Remedies.
Termination of the Agreement pursuant to Section 5 above and the limited monetary
damages remedy set forth herein shall be the sole and exclusive remedies of a non-defaLllting party
with respect to any default hereunder, and neither party shall be liable to the other party for
additional losses or damages suffered by the other party as a result thereof. Without limiting the
foregoing, in no event shall either party or its respective officers, directors, partners, shareholders,
agents or employees be liable to the other party hereunder for special, indirect, consequentiai,
punitive or exemplary damages of any nature or kind whatsoever except as expressly provided
herein, including loss of profits or revenue, lost business opportunity, lost contracts or loss of use,
and each party hereby releases the other therefrom. The parties intend that the waivers and
disclaimers of liability, releases from liability, limitations of liability, and exclusive remedy provisions
expressed in this Section shall apply, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, even in the event of
the fault, negligence (in whole or in part), strict liability or breach of contract of the party released
or whose liability is waived, disclaimed, limited or fixed by such exclusive remedy provision, and
shall extend to such party's affiliates and contractors, and to its and their partners, shareholders,
directors, officers, employees and agents. The parties also intend and agree that such provisions
shall continue in full force and effect notwithstanding the expiration or earlier termination of the
Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event of a default hereunder, the non-defaulting
party reserves the right to pursue the other for monetary damages in an amount limited to the out-
of-pocket costs incurred by the non-defaulting party in connection with the Agreement, not to
exceed a maximum damages recovery of $25,000. This limitation on damages shall not operate to
limit Developer's right to the return of any unexpended ENA Deposit funds pursuant to Section
3.1.2, nor Developer's right to reimbursement for certain out-of-pocket costs pursuant to Section
6.3, which shall be Deveioper's rights in addition to any claim for monetary damages up to
$25,000 under this Section.
8.8 Indemnitv.
Developer shall indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless City/Agency, its elected
officials, employees and agents from and against any and all challenges to this Agreement, or any
and all losses, liabilities, damages, claims or costs (including attorneys' fees) arising from
Developer's negligent acts, errors, or omissions with respect its obligations hereunder or the
Property, excluding any such losses arising from the sole negligence or sole willful misconduct of
City/Agency or the conduct of third parties outside the control of the Developer. This indemnity
obligation shall survive the termination of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the
event of a third party challenge to the validity of this Agreement, Developer shall have the option to
terminate this Agreement in lieu of its indemnity obligation.
8.9 Assionment.
City/Agency would not have entered into this Agreement but for Developer's unique
qualifications and experience. Therefore, Developer's rights and obligations under this Agreement
may not be assigned without the prior written approval of City/Agency in its sole discretion.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, subject to the reasonable prior written approval of the Executive
Director, Developer may assign its rights hereunder to a new entity comprised of the Developer for
j,\COMMDEV\Estes\Agency Gene'ailENA E STREET TOD FINAL.doc Page 14 of 18
....3 -..2.:J-..
purposes of developing the Project. Such new entity may include additional parties provided that
the Developer retains responsibility for fulfilling its obiigations hereunder and Developer retains
management control and authority over the entity and the Project.
8.10 Time is of the Essence.
Time is of the essence for each of Oeveloper's obiigations under this Agreement
[ NEXT PAGE IS SIGNATURE PAGE]
j;ICOMMDEVIEstesIAgency GenerallENA E STREET TOD FINAL.doc Page 15 of 18
...3 - 23
09/05/02 THU 08: 13 FAX 619 232 2127 BARONE GAI,AS~Q.... ^'-, ---. ~OO2
~oCZ
SIGNATURE PAGE
TO
EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have e""cuted ~his Agreement ;'is of the date set forth
above, therebv indicating the co~sent of 'their principals,
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF BARONE AND GALASSO AND ASSOCIATES.
CHULA VISTA ,.c~
By: ..-
Shirl"y Horton By:
Chair Michael B. Galasso, resident
CITY OF CHULA VISTA ~ -
.
By: -..--
Shirley Honan THE OLSON COMPANY
Mayor
By:..
Approved as to form: Tony Pauker. Managing Director
By:__., "'-""-'-
JotU'l M. Kaheny By:
Agency Attorney 1 City Attorney Todd Olson. Managing Director
Approved a$ to content:
By: -
Chris Salomone
E)(ecut;ye Secretary /
Community Development Director
J:\COMMOEVIEst"sIAoenov G.nerBI\ENA E STREET TOo FINALdoc Page 16 of 1 (I
...ß - .2-<1
09-05-2002 15 :46 FROM-OLSON COMPANY +15625964703 T-621 po02/005 F-403
SIGNATURE PAGE
TO
EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth
above, thereby indicating the consent of their principals.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY BARONE AND GALASSO AND ASSOCIATES,
OF CHULA VISTA INC.
By:
Shirley Horton By:
Chair Michael B. Galasso, President
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
James V. Barone, SecretaryfTreasurer
By:
Shirley Horton
Mayor
By:
Approved as to form: .,T~~'
By:
John M. Kaheny
Agency Attorney / City Attorney Todd Olson, Managing Director
Approved as to content:
By:
Chris Salomone
Executive Secretary 1
Community Development Director
C:IDocuments and SetlingsltpaukerlLocal SettlngslT.mporafY Int.met FilesIOLK2lSign.tur. page.doc Page 1 of 2
II e~ lit.
,j~ ¡~
i
m
(J)
~
CD
.....
-I
..,
II)
:::I
en
;::¡:
0
..,
(i)'
:::1m
(i)Š-
a. -.
0-
~~ ;9
ëß .. ~I
~ i
3
CD
:::I
.....
'"C
Ò
"0
CD
;:+
~l I DO ~ :
~~ö==~
g¡fiOOo.
¡¡¡ ". 4' ¡r
0 cn.g:J
UI 0 CD s-
UI »aQ.
:: ~mo
0 ,,~
!!¡ CD
~ ¡.g
-:¡¡ 3
¡z ~ I
0 II> "tI
[ a
~ !
~ ëD
II> ..
õ'
.3.
EXHIBIT B
,~,
~
"
~
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT B
....
PAGE 1, ITEM NO.: q
MEETING DATE: 09-10-02
JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY / CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE: JOINT PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
TO THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR l\\- -Çtì ts
REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR.&f",rj.-
4/5THS VOTE: YESDNO0
BACKGROUND
The Southwest Redevelopment Plan was adopted on November 27, 1990 in order to improve
deteriorated properties in the areas along Main Street, south Broadway, and south Third Avenue.
Since its adoption, the Redevelopment Plan has authorized the use of eminent domain to acquire
property within the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. Pursuant to the California
Community Redevelopment law and the Redevelopment Plan, the Agency's eminent domain
authority is restricted to an initial 12-year time period following the effective date of the ordinance
adopting the Redevelopment Plan. The Redevelopment Plan's eminent domain authority is
scheduled to expire on November 27, 2002.
Redevelopment Law allows the City Council to extend this time limit for up to an additional 12
years by amending the Redevelopment Plan. Though it has been sparingly used by the Agency in
the Project Area, eminenf domain is a critical tool needed by the Agency to effectuate the
redevelopment of blighted properties in the Proiect Area. Specifically, eminent domain can be an
essential adiunct to property acquisition negotiations involving redevelopment of incompatible
uses, inadequately sized lots, and dilapidated buildings.
On August 6th, staff presented the Report to the City Council on the Fourth Amendment to the
Southwest Redevelopment Plan. On that night the Agency/Council opened the public hearing to
took public testimony, continued the hearing until Sepfember 10, and directed staff to hold a
community meeting to further review and discuss the issue. In this report, staff has provided
Council an update on the community meeting, held August 28 at the Otay Recreation Center,
and a brief description of the community issues.
RECOMMENDATION
That the City Council and Redevelopment Agency receive testimony on the proposed Fourth
Amendment to the Southwest Redevelopment Plan and close the public hearing. Staff will return
4- {
PAGE 2, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 09-10-02
on September 17th for Agency/Council consideration of the negative declaration, the Report to
City Council, and the Fourth Amendment to the Southwest Redevelopment Project.
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
Sections 33451, 33454, and 33458 of the California Community Redevelopment Law ("CRL")
require that the Agency and the City Council hold public hearings (or a joint public hearing) prior
to adopting the Fourth Amendment to the Southwest Redevelopment Plan.
On June 4, 2002, the Redevelopment Agency/City Council initiated the process to amend the
Southwest Redevelopment Plan to extend the power of eminent domain for another twelve-year
period through September 2014. At that meeting the Agency/City Council set the time and place
for a joint public hearing to consider the proposed amendment and take public testimony for
August 6, 2002.
On July 23, 2002, the Redevelopment Agency adopted a resolution approving the Report on the
proposed Fourth Amendment and transmitting that report to the City Council for their
consideration at tonight's meeting. The purpose of the Report is to provide the information,
documentation, and evidence required to support the adoption of the amendment fo the
Southwest Redevelopment Plan extending the eminent domain authority.
On August 6, 2002, the Agency/City Council opened the public hearing to take public testimony.
Said public hearing was kept opened and continued until September 10,2002.
On August 28, 2002, staff conducted a public meeting at the Otay Recreation Center, the results
of which are described later in this report.
On September 17, 2002, a resolution will be presented for adoption to the City Council
approving the Negative Declaration prepared on the amendment and approving written
responses to written objections. On that same date the City Council will conduct the first reading
of the ordinance, consider the Negative Declaration and written responses to written objections
from the public. On October 1, 2002, the City Council will consider the second reading of the
ordinance and, if approved, formally adopt the Fourth Amendment to the Southwest Plan
extending the Agency's power of eminent domain for twelve years through September 17, 2014.
PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAM
The California Redevelopment Law also requires the Agency to conduct public hearing to inform
the public of the amendment, th~ process to be followed by the Agency/City Council, and to
receive public testimony. The following actions have been taken in this respect. Notice of the
hearing, along with an introductory letter from the City Manoger, was mailed via first class on
July 2, 2002 to all property owners, residential tenants, and business tenants located within the
Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. The notice and letter from the City Manager were in
English and Spanish. Taxing agencies also were mailed a copy of the notice on July 5, 2002.
Additionolly, the notice was also published in one of the local papers, as required by law. On
July 21, it was published in the San Diego Union Tribune, and on July 26, and August 3,2002 in
the Chula Vista Star News.
~-.J..
PAGE 3, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 09-10-02
Staff has received several written comments and objections to the Amendmenf. These will be
added to any other comments received during tonight's public hearing, and responses will be
prepared and presented to the Agency/City Council at the meeting of September 17th, os
required by the California Redevelopment Law. These responses will then be entered into the
record and adopted by City Council resolution. Section 33364 of the CRL requires that a
redevelopment plan, or an amendment to a redevelopment plan, may only be adopted by the
City Council after consideration of written objections, and the adoption of written findings in
response to written objections.
COMMUNITY' WORKSHOP
As directed by Council, City staff held a workshop on August 28 with the community on the
Southwest Redevelopment Project Area's planned amendment to continue the Agency's ability to
use eminent domain on non-residentially zoned properties. Approximately 100 residents
attended the meeting, held at the Otay Recreation Center. Two Power Point presentations were
given by staff: one was on eminent domain, and the other was an overview of the progress made
by the Redevelopment Agency to revitalize the redevelopment areas. Testimony and questions
from the audience covered a number of concerns, such as when would eminent domain be used,
how would it be used, why does the Agency need eminent domain, and where would it be
applied. Many attendees live in areas already zoned residential and were informed that they
would not be subject to eminent domain. Other residents and business owners are in
industrially-zoned areas that need revitalization and could be subject to the use of eminent
domain.
Staff clarified for the residents that eminent domain is used very rarely in the City, and only for
projects with strong community support and economic benefits. In general, attendees were not
supportive of keeping eminent domain authority. Most felt that having the possibility of using
eminent domain over their property poses a variety of disadvantages, such as the difficulty of
selling their property and the potential decrease in value. Residents of the Jacqua Street
neighborhood (located south of Main Street and east of Industrial Boulevard) expressed concerns
about their neighborhood (20 lots with 18 single-family residences) being in an industrial zone,
and therefore subject to eminent domain. Staff indicated that if they so desired, staff would be
willing to support a rezoning of that residential subdivision from industrial to residential, thereby
exempting them from eminent domain subject to City Council approval. (A meeting is being set
for September 5, 2002 with these residents to further discuss this issue. A verbal report will be
given to the Agency/Council on the results of this meeting.)
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact is expected from tonight's actions.
nCOMMDEV\STAFF.REP\O9-1 0-O2\Report on Public Heor;ng on Fourth Amendment.doc
4-3