Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1989/05/04 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, May 4, 1989 Council Chambers 7:00 p.m. Public Services Building ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Cox; Members McCandliss, Nader, Malcolm and Moore MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Assistant City Manager Asmus; Acting Community Development Director Gustafson; Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman; Assistant City Attorney Rudolf 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 4/18/89 MSUC (Moore/McCandliss) to approve the minutes of 4/18/89 as submitted. (The vote was 4-0; Member Malcolm abstained due to his absence from that meeting.) 2. RESOLUTION 1014 APPROVING A CONTRACT FOR AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION SURVEYING OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTIES, 368 - 340 BAY BOULEVARD AND 310 BAY BOULEVARD The Agency owns lots 368-340 Bay Boulevard and is considering acquisition of 310 Bay Boulevard for the purpose of assembling the lots for redevelopment. A condition for sale of these lots to a developer is an American Land Title Association (ALTA) survey of property detailing all lot lines, easements, encroachments, and other physical title encumbrances that might affect eventual development. A Request for Proposals was issued for the surveying work necessary to obtain ALTA Insurance. It was recommended that the Agency adopt the resolution approving a contract with Hall Engineering, Inc. for ALTA survey services in the Bayfront Redevelopment Project Area for an amount not-to-exceed $7,400. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOLM, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent. Member Nader asked if there would be a necessity for an ALTA survey if the properties were leased? Acting Community Development Director Gustafson responded that if the eventuality occurs that the Agency would proceed with a lease, tile necessity for an ALTA survey could be taken up at that time. The Agency would be prepared, if this resolution is adopted, to engage in a sale if the opportunity comes up quickly. On this date, staff received a preliminary submittal from Rohr Corporation outlining their interest in purchasing the subject property. Member McCandliss asked if the money is spent now on the ALTA surveys, will there be an opportunity to recoup the money at a later date. Mr. Gustafson stated this would be included in negotiations for the price of the property. Tile resolution was approved. (The vote was 4~1; Member Nader opposed.) MINUTES -2- May~4;'1989 3. RESOLUTION lO15 ACCEPTING CONTRACT WORK FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CUL-DE-SAC AND LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTION OF FIG AVENUE AND SHASTA STREET IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND ASSESSING LIQUIDATED DAMAGES On October 20, 1988, the Redevelopment Agency by Resolution No. 965, awarded a contract in the amount of $38,000 (including contingencies) to Silver Strand Contractors. The contract was for the construction of cul-de-sac and landscaping improvements at the intersection of Fig Avenue and Shasta Street. The work is now completed. It was recommended that the Agency approve a resolution accepting the contract work and assessing liquidated damages of $3,400. RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER NADER, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent, passed and approved unanimously. 4. REPORT: ALTERNATIVE PLANS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE CHULA VISTA CENTER AT FOURTH AVENUE AND "F" STREET At the Agency meeting of April 6, 1989, the owners of the Chula Vista Center at Fourth and "F" Street submitted their renovation plans for approval of an Owner Participation Agreement. In reviewing the plans which improve existing facades and the parking areas, the Agency requested that staff, with assistance from a professional architect, further review plans to determine whether there were any alternatives which would result in better site utilization and design. Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman stated staff, with the assistance of Doug Childs, the City's contract architect, undertook a study of the site to determine if there were any alternatives for redevelopment. Mr. Childs developed 12 alternatives. The alternatives solve some parking problems, but they result in a loss of commercial space and consequently loss of sales tax revenue to the City. The alternatives would also cost the City between one and two million dollars in subsidy which would not be recovered. Staff believes that an "all or nothing" approach is the best approach. If the whole site is considered for redevelopment, it would best be accomplished by the current owners of both sites. If the Agency was to become involved, it would cost the Agency a substantial amount of money (approximately $6 - 7 million). The tax increment revenues which would accrue from redevelopment of the site would not justify this substantial investment. Staff is, therefore, recommending reconsideration of an Owner Participation Agreement. Doug Childs, the City's contract architect, presented the twelve alternative design plans. He noted the property boundaries used in the plans were Fourth Avenue, "F" Street, Garrett Avenue and Center Street. A number of opportunities were looked at ranging from doing minimal work to upgrade the parking all the way to starting from scratch. The twelve alternatives are interim measures which could be done to mitigate the problems (i.e, lack of parking and aesthetics of the existing project). MINUTES -3- MaN 4i 1989 Responding to questions, Mr. Childs stated the Photo Mat was not considered in all of the alternatives. He further stated that he had met with Mr. Delawie, the architect for the owner of the center, as well as Mr. Richard Zogob. Both Mr. Delawie and Mr. Zogob had reviewed the alternatives, however, Mr. Childs worked independently to quickly look at what could be done with the subject site. Responding to Member McCandliss' concerns, Mr. Kassman stated it was assumed, based on discussions with the owners, that the owners would not be cooperating with redevelopment as proposed in the alternatives, ~nless they were reimbursed for loss of commercial space and rental income. Staff assumed they would have to acquire the property, clear it and sell it back. This is how staff developed the figures in the chart attached to the agenda statement. Member Malcolm expressed his dissatisfaction with the staff report presented to the Agency. He commented it did not address .his concerns in order for him to make a decision. Mr. Robert Caplan, attorney representing the property owner, answered questions of Agency members. He reported that there are presently 8 years remaining on the lease for the Santa Fe property. They tried to negotiate a purchase or an extension of the lease but were not successful. This strip of property (ll,O00 square feet) is currently covered by building space. It is desired that the Agency assist in the acquisition of this strip of land in terms of the legal aspect. All of the funds necessary to acquire the property would be provided by the owner of the center. There is no obligation on the part of the Agency at this point. Responding to Chairman Cox' questions, Mr. Caplan stated it is anticipated that their proposed improvements would have a life span of approximately 15-20 years. Chairman Cox suggested that the Agency acquire the Santa Fe property and hold onto it. At that point, the Agency would negotiate with the owner of the center regarding an extension of the lease of the property. Mr. Caplan stated that in order to amortize the cost of the proposed improvements, they would need a lease of 15 years. Mr. Homer Delawie, 2827 Presidio Drive, San Diego, the architect for the proposed project, addressed the Agency. He noted that the property owner came to the conclusion that the best thing to do is to improve the Center as much as possible at this time and then at 10-15 years take another look at the Center. Because it is not possible to meet the parking or landscape requirements without reducing some of the retail, they came up with the idea of creating an arcade across the front of the retail stores and heavily landscaping the parking lot. It is also proposed to paint the building to tie in with the Civic Center. They have met numerous times with City staff as well as with the Design Review Committee and received the:r approval. MINUTES -4- May 4, 1989 Member McCandliss asked if it would be required that the buildings would be brought up to current fire standards and codes as part of the Owner Participation Agreement. Mr. Delawie noted this building was built in 1950 and there are parts of it that do not meet the Code. All of the parts that will be affected by the proposal will have to be brought up to Code. The parts that will not be worked on (i.e., the interior of the stores) will not be required to be brought up to Code until such time as a new lease with tenant improvements takes place. Member McCandliss commented that the center clearly needs to be renovated. The renovation proposed by the landowner may solve the aesthetic problem, however, it also creates a traffic and parking problem. What is being presented to the Agency is unacceptable unless the parking problem can be taken care of in some other way than just paying an in-lieu fee. Ms. McCandliss also had wanted the staff report to look at alternatives to try to bring together the resources and power of the Redevelopment Agency with the cooperation of the landowner to come up with site plans and alternatives that might work from both standpoints. That information was not presented to the Agency in the staff report. Mr. Richard Zogob, 315 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, appeared before the Agency. He noted that he is a property owner and the developer of the downtown redevelopment project. He proposed building one, large administrative center on this site that would house all of the public agencies (city, county, school districts, utilities, etc.). The center is now at a crossroads as far as tenancies; all tenancies are expiring this year. Therefore, the cost for relocation would be mi. nimal. Mr. Zo§ob further noted he presented this idea to the Project Area Committee at their meeting of this same date. He gave a copy of the plans to the Agency for their review. Mr. John Grasilla of Park Medical Pharmacy, Chula Vista Doctors' Park, stated they are one of three pharmacies located within a block of the subject center. He noted concern with the possibility that Sav-On/Osco Drug Store may be leasing the site currently leased by the Canned Food Store. Currently the three existing pharmacies serve the needs of the community, primarily many older people who are unable to leave their homes. They provide delivery service to these people, whereas Sav-On would not provide this type of service. He stated that if Sav-On does lease the site, it will drastically affect the three pharmacies. Mm. Joe Grasilla of Park Medical Pharmacy, Chula Vista Doctors' Park, stated he believes there is a major problem with parking at this site. He further commented that reconstructing the facade does not address the parking problem. With Sav-On coming in there will be a worse parking problem than there is now. Mr. Don Micale, Poor Gourmet Restaurant located in the subject center, stated that his only concern is to continue what he is doing now; to put out a good meal for a low price. He can only do that if his costs do not go up too high. People patronize this shopping center that are a majority of low to MINUTES -5- May 4~ 1989 middle income. Mr. Micale further stated that the retail stores that are suggested to be eliminated in the alternatives are the stores that do not heavily use parking spaces. He noted his trade is mostly people who walk to his restaurant. Mr. Caplan addressed the Agency again and commented he believes the Agency is faced with a decision that would at best be a compromise. The options are either a public subsidy of +$5 million in order to have complete redevelopment or the renovation proposed-by the property owner. They are asking for no subsidy and are prepared to spend their own money for the renovation. The owner is negotiating with Sav-On, however, they do not have a transaction as yet. They are also looking for a food store. The owners would like the ability to go ahead with their proposal. Chairman Cox co~nented he believes no one is totally satisfied with the alternatives before the Agency. Because of'the commitments the Agency currently has with all the redevelopment areas, he does not believe it is possible to commit the amount of redevelopment funds that would be necessary to have complete redevelopment of this site. Ruling that out, it is desirable to physically improve the appearance of the site. The best party to do this is the existing owner. The Agency may want to be in the position in the future to reassess what the opportunities might be. MOTION MS (Cox/Malcolm) direct staff to (1) bring back an Owner Participation Agreement for the proposal that was presented previously for the redevelopment of the site; (2) direct staff to begin the condemnation process for the acquisition of the Santa Fe property; and (3) direct staff to negotiate with Mr. Kolke and Mr. Caplan regarding the leasing of that property back to them. Member Nader commented that the only justification for financial subsidy at this site would have been a grocery store for the convenience of the citizens in the area. It has been established that this site would not work for a major grocery store. He does not see the justification for the expenditure involved in any of the alternatives that have been presented. From both a financial and public benefit point of view, he believes that the motion on the floor is appropriate. His concern is that given that the Agency will be actively participating in this arrangement, he believes that it is appropriate for the Agency to look at the impact this project will have on surrounding businesses and on citizens in the surrounding area. Member McCandliss stated she will vote to have the Owner Participation Agreement come back. She asked that staff spend more time in the staff report discussing parking alternatives and parking solutions for downtown. She would like the in-lieu fee issue addressed, the current fee versus what has been paid recently for parking spaces downtown, and de a better job of analysis. She noted conditions may be placed on parking. If there was an opportunity for an independent grocery store to locate at this site, she would like to see this pursued. MINUTES -6- MaN 4~ 1989 Responding to Member Moore's question, Mr. Kassman stated it is anticipated the Owner Participation Agreement will come before the Agency at the meeting of May 18, 1989 at 4:00 p.m. VOTE ON THE MOTION The motion passed unanimously. 5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. 6. DIRECTOR'S REPORT: Assistant City Manager Asmus informed the Agency that there will be an item concerning Baldwin Company on the City Council agenda for Tuesday, May 9, 1989~ ?. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: None. 8. MEMBERS' COMMENTS: None. ADJOURNMENT at 8:15 p.m. to Closed Session to discuss the potential acquisition of property located at: Parcel No. 568-420-15 located in the Town Centre I Redevelopment Project Area (Sarah Smith, owner); and 428 "F" Street (Security Title Insurance Co., owners Anthony Schools~. Adjourned from Closed Session at 9:15 p.m. to the regular meeti~f May ~.,..~t 4:00 p.m. David Gustafson Acting Community Development Di rector WPC 4068H