HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Packet 1995/02/21
-
Thesday, February 21, 1995 Council Chambers
6:00 p.m. Public Services Building
Ømmediately following the City Council meeting)
Rel!Ular Meetin~ of the RedeveloDment A~encv of the Citv of Chula Vista
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL: Members Fox -' Moot -, Padilla -, Rindone -' and
Chairman Horton -
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Meeting of February 14, 1995
CONSENT CALENDAR
None Submitted.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
The following items 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
Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak
in favor of the staff recommeadation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.)
Comments are limited to five minutes per individual.
3. PUBLIC HEARING EXTENSION OF SUBLEASE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 818
BROADWAY TO SOUTH BAY CHEVROLET COMPANY, INC., AND
MR. EDUARDO MARTORELL, WITHOUT PUBLIC BIDDING
PURSUANT TO SECTION 33431 OF THE COMMUNITY
REDEVELOPMENT LA W--The Agency acquired the leasehold interest in the
property as part of the acquisition of the dealership's properties for the Auto
Park project. South Bay Chevrolet has decided to continue to sell used cars at
the site and requests reconveyance of the lease and leasehold interests. Staff
reconunends approval of the n:solution. Continued from the meetin~ of
Februarv 7. 1995. (Conununity Development Director)
RESOLUTION 1445 AUTHORIZING THE EXTENSION OF SUBLEASE FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 818 BROADWAY TO SOUTH BAY CHEVROLET
COMPANY, INC., AND MR. EDUARDO MARTORELL, AND
AUTHORIZING THE CHAiRMAN TO EXECUTE SAME
ORAL COMMUNiCATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the Redevelopment Agency on any subject mntter within
the Agency's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law, however, generally prohibits the
Redevelopment Agency from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to
address the Council on such a subject, please complete the yellow "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. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker.
-.
Agenda -2- February 21, 1995
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 public. The items will be considered individually by the Agency
and staff recommendations 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 Secrelary to the Redevelopment
Agency or the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Public comments are limited to five minutes.
4. REPORT RESULT OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR SOUTH BAY
CHEVROLET SITE-- Two proposals were received in response to the Request
for Proposals. Proponents will further describe their proposals. Staff
recommends the Agency direct staff to continue to investigate alternatives for the
reuse of this site. (Community Development Director)
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
This is the time the Redevelopment Agency will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent
Calendar. Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Agency
Members. Public comments are limited to five minutes per individual.
OTHER BUSINESS
5. DIRECTOR'S REPORT(S)
6. CHAiRMAN'S REPORT(S)
7. MEMBER COMMENTS
a. Redevelopment Agnecy C.I.P. Funds Report
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting will adjourn to a Special Redevelopment Agency Meeting on February 28, 1995 at 6:00 p.m.,
immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers.
******
COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), request
individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City
meeting, activity, or service request such accommodation at least forty-eight 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 hearing
impaired.
"I dec'.cc~ ::J1'e' - -/..,.: that I em
2"'110. :0..: !oJ :~ tre
[C:I WPS lIAGENCYIAGENDASI02-21-9S.AGD] Cei ,', :l'c."'~thatlposted
tt /~ ,".'r'j at tt¡¡¡
~. ,. .'. ,/:' .c" u:,,' "
:~:~~~/ i-' .~~,.~!;'~I ~:), 'y'" ii, on" >' '..
-.
MINUTES OF A SPECiAL MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday, February 14, 1995 Council Chambers
7:58 p.m. Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Members Fox, Moot, Padilla, Rindone, and Chair Horton (arrived at 8:02 p.m.)
ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, Director; Bruce M. Boogaard, Agency Attorney; and Beverly A.
Authelet, City Clerk
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 7, 1995
MSC (FoxlRindone) to approve the minutes of Fehruary 7, 1995 as presented. Approved 4-0-1 with Horton
absent.
BUSINESS
3. REPORT FISCAL YEAR 1994/95 MID-YEAR AGENCY BUDGET REVIEW - At the time the
Agency approved the FY 1994/95 budget, Members requested a mid-year report be compiled for Agency review
and discussion. Staff recommends the Agency accept the report. Continued from the meeting of February 7,
1995. (Community Development Director)
Mr. Goss stated that during the process of looking at the RDA budget for FY 1994/95 a number of negative impacts
on the RDA had been identified. Many of those impacts were due to actions by the State, the reassessment of
Rohr's property several years ago, and the down turn of the economy. Because of the aggressive nature of the
RDA's activities in the past there was currently a situation where there was a need to transform assets of the Agency
into liquid assets in order to maintain its ability to pay for its operations as well as debt service and other
obligations. At that time staff outlined a number of areas and activities the Agency was focusing on and staff made
a commitment at that time that it was a number one priority. Staff was prepared to answer any questions.
Member Fox stated former Councilmember Moore was consistent in reminding everyone that the RDA was unique
and not run like any other agencylbusiness and that much of the revenue were not retained by the Agency, but went
to the general fund. He referred to page 3-8, Broadway Plaza, and questioned if the net annual sales tax revenues
were for the remainder FY 1995/96 or
for a full fiscal year.
Lyle Haynes, Principal Community Development Specialist, replied that the figure was at year three at a stabilized
revenue after the full build-out of the center.
Member Fox questioned if staff was able to estimate annual sales tax revenue for FY 1995/96.
Mr. Haynes responded that he was uncertain as to when the City would receive revenues from FY 1995/96.
Member Fox stated the Agency had to take risks at times and one of the biggest risks taken was the commitment
to build a project on the Mid-Bayfront. That development had not occurred and he questioned if the project did
not materialize in the next 10-15 years what impact it would have on the Agency. If the Agency and general fund
would be in serious jeopardy.
Mr. Salomone replied that decisions were made in the late 70's to support the project. Staff felt there were very
positive things currently going on in the State and with the new owner of the Bayfront. Staff was currently watching
the budget and reporting back to Council. Absent its development the affect would be very negative.
dol
-
Minutes
February 14, 1995
Page 2
Mr. Goss replied that he was not sure that it would put the general fund in jeopardy because it was a larger fund
and there was more discretion there. There would be an opportunity to modify operating expense if the RDA funds
and general fund were interlinked financially. Clearly, it would have a major down side for the Agency.
Member Fox stated that was one of his greatest fears, i.e. too much reliance had been placed on the Mid-Bayfront
project. He did not want the City to have its back against the wall and have to accept any project for the Bayfront.
He questioned what else could be done to mitigate those concerns and spread that reliance around to other projects.
Mr. Salomone felt the things happening in the other project areas were very positive. He then reviewed projects
within those areas. The Bayfront was important, but it was not the whole solution.
Member Fox stated he wanted to see the Agency aggressively pursue those other projects.
Member Rindone stated he did not feel if the Mid-Bayfront was not developed it would cause insolvency of the
general fund, but it would severely impact and negatively curtail the services provided by the City through the
general fund. Under Item 3, page 3-2, tax allocation refunding bonds and savings, it did not point out the increase
in debt service from the year 2011-2024. He felt that should be included in future reports. He questioned what
the other proposals were for Southbay Chevrolet.
Mr. Salomone replied that the Agency had received an unsolicited proposal that staff felt was very attractive. The
result of the RFP would be before the Agency at their next meeting. He felt the RFP should be dealt with prior
to discussing other options.
Member Rindone requested that the information be made available to the Members. The option listed to the RFP
for the EI Dorado building was raising rents and assessments to the tenants and the tenants were the City and
Southbay Community Services. Southbay Community Services provided services to the City and he was uncertain
whether they could pay the higher rates.
Mr. Goss stated it had been clearly identified during the process, and the El Dorado building was an example, that
the Agency had helped subsidize some of the City's general operations by buying the building and providing
expansion space for the Civic Center and for City functions. One question that could be raised was whether or not
the City was paying the fair amount for that occupancy. In reviewing the balance between the general fund and the
Agency that probably needed to be addressed. The City helped subsidize Southbay Community Services rent even
before they were in the EI Dorado building. There was an argument that other community agencies did not have
their rent subsidized and that Southbay Community Services had grown and was more successful in obtaining grants
and other support. Many of the grants had administrative funds that could be used for rent, utility services, etc.
Perhaps that should be revisited as an issue- Circumstances for Southbay Community Services and the City had
changed.
Chair Horton questioned if it was staffs opinion that the best thing to do was to go out with an RFP to sell the El
dorado building or keep it long term and lease it for future financial benefits.
Mr. Goss replied that earlier in the year he would have recommended selling the building because of the prospects
of getting enough cash for the current fiscal year. There were currently three properties that looked promising, i.e.
Southbay Chevrolet and the Mid-Bayfront properties being sold to the Port. Therefore, he would be more inclined
to rent the building and review it again in conjunction with the FY 1995/96 budget. He recommended moving
forward with the RFP process.
Member Rindone stated the report made some assumptions but there was no solid short term plan presented. Of
the four items presented in the Proposed Financial Plan Recommendations the only one that had been completed
was the mid-year progress report. There was a serious fmancial problem and it was evident that there had been
a lack of progress toward developing a solution, especially a long term solution. He questioned if the assumptions
in Table A and Table B were completed, what potential shortfall the Agency would be looking at in FY 1995/96.
Mr. Goss replied that there could be a similar shortfall and that was why the mid-year review had been established.
It was not only going to be the'Agency, but other funds within the City that would have to be examined. The action
d-.).
.- -
Minutes
February 14, 1995
Page 3
plan addressed in the report was for the current fiscal year and they would have to address the issue next year also.
He did not feel the State would be taking any more money away from the Agency, but they would also not be giving
back any of the money they had taken away in the past. Staff was moving forward regarding the sale of the Fuller
Ford site and had completed the RFP process for the Chevrolet site, and would be coming back with a
recommendation that the RFP process be terminated. Staff felt there was a good proposal outside of that process
to be considered. He had met with the past Port Commissioner, current Port Commissioner, and Acting Port
Director regarding the sale of two properties to the Port and felt confident that it could be accomplished during the
current fiscal year.
Member Rindone stated it was encouraging that incremental steps bad been made but none of the sales had been
consummated and the RFP had not been issued for the El Dorado building. The question that had to be asked, if
Table B was completed, would there still be a significant funding shortfall in FY 1995/96.
Mr. Goss felt the Agency would probably have to face that issue, but he was not prepared to address it as it would
be part of the overall review of City and Agency finances during the budget process.
Member Rindone stated the Agency could not continue selling off assets in order to make up the budget shortfall
because they would run out of assets. It was not the solution, the solution was Item 7, page 3-5, Development
Projects. The Agency needed to push those four projects heavily because the problem would not be solved by
selling off assets but by generating revenue. He requested support by Agency Members to push for one or more
of the projects to be completed within two years or less. He questioned whether the Agency needed to look at
staffing in order to get the projects going.
Mr. Goss stated there was a need to try to develop and improve the revenue stream within the Agency over the next
several years. Staffing would be looked at in terms of the 1995/96 budget process. Staff was working very hard
but he was not sure that he had observed where staffing had slowed down any projects. Delays had been outside
the ability of the City, staff, or Agency.
Member Moot stated Town Centre I and II appeared to be the biggest drain on the budget and questioned if that
was something that would turn around at a certain point and become a positive.
Mr. Salomone replied that Town Centre II included Chula Vista Center and bonds had been issued to do the first
expansion. Again, bonds were issued to do the expansion and add Mervyns so there was bonded indebtedness.
Ultimately, they did come into the black over a period of years, but because of the bonded indebtedness it impacted
that area in particular. Staff would be presenting the Agency with tables regarding that issue during the budget
process.
Mr. Haynes stated there were three certificates of participation issued for Town Center II. One would fall out FY
1997/98, $150,000 - $200,000. The other two went on for a significant period of time after that.
Chair Horton questioned what sales tax revenues would be received by the general fund from the project area.
Mr. Salomone stated staff would have to report back to the Agency with those figures.
Member Moot questioned what the relationship was between the sales tax revenues of completed projects versus
the Redevelopment Agency's net shortfall. It did not appear that there was a one to one relationship.
Mr. Salomone stated the Agency was dependent upon property tax alone, but the task the Agency was charged with
by the State was to do a whole lot of things including generate revenue for the general fund that took care of a lot
of blighting influences, police protection, parks, etc. It was not a one to one relationship. All agencies in the State
were in debt and had to be to justify getting the increased property tax when they adopted the Agency.
Member Moot asked if there was some level of debt that was normal or expected.
Mr. Salomone replied that there was not, it was up to the individual Boards.
~:) ~3
Minutes
February 14, 1995
Page 4
Member Moot questioned how the completed projects reduced the Agency's debt.
Mr. Salomone responded that completed projects generated tremendous amounts of property taxes. Once completed
the property value would be reassessed and the increment above the property lAx from when it was adopted would
go to the Agency.
Member Rindone stated the costs and expenses of the Agency helped to bear the expenses of City staff that would
normally be charged to the general fund. It was correct that the Agency had to be in debt to operate but not to the
point where it would cause an insolvency or a tremendous impact on the general fund.
Member Moot felt the City benefited more from the projects than the Redevelopment Agency. He questioned if
that was the reason some cities lent money from their general funds to their agencies.
Mr. Goss informed Members that the Agency owed the City of Chula Vista money that bad not been paid back.
That was very typical also and had happened in all the project areas. It was seed money with the hopes that there
would be a pay back.
Member Padilla referred to the Sale of Agency Assets and the contamination issues on the Capos property. He
questioned who would be bearing the cost of clean-up.
Mr. Salomone replied that all the analysis on the Capos property had been done by the Port District. Staff expected
to propose to the Port if they were going to purchase the property that they deal with the mitigation as part of their
CIP. The Agency would go after the actoal contaminators and their insurance companies. Staff had had success
in doing that on a number of contaminated sites.
Member Padilla questioned if staff for the budget process of 1995/96 would have specific ideas for increasing the
general fund percentage share of funding community development and deferring low yield capital improvements.
Mr. Goss stated staff would examine that in light of the clarification of State law as to what would be appropriate
and how much of the economic development activity could be funded by the Redevelopment Agency and how much
by the general fund. If it appeared to be appropriate, staff would provide a modification in the formula.
Member Padilla felt that would be the case as they neared the end of the fiscal year and felt the Agency may want
to look at those areas outside of the asset sales. He agreed with Member Rindone regarding the need for long term
completions to generate revenues.
Member Fox stated the real problems were with the projects that were not happening. The work plan listed four
projects but staff had verbally referred to several other projects that had not been listed.
Mr. Salomone responded that the report had emphasized the biggest projects with the greatest return. Staff was
actively staffmg the Southwest Project Area and working with those projects concurrently with other projects. Staff
did not know exactly what would happen there but felt the potential was there.
Mr. Goss stated there were projects staff were working on, i.e. expansion of the auto park and Mid-BaYfront, that
were almost givens and had to be listed as high priority projects. The Southwest Project Area was 1,100 acres and
given the way the tax increment worked, even without any specific projects, any project would help the increment.
MS (FoxlPadilla) to approve the report and the proposed work plan for January through July 1995 as
described in Section B, and infonn the City's Port represenlative of the Agency's desire to move the sale of
the Bayfront properties to the FY 1994/95 Port CIP from the FY 1998/99 Port CIP,
Member Rindone questioned how many of the items in the work plan, excluding Item 7 could be completed by the
end of FY 1994/95.
Mr. Salomone replied: I) the RFP for the El Dorado building could be completed; 2) an agreement had been
reached with the Port District and he felt it could be completed; 3) Lower Sweetwater Valley was not figured into
the Table, but staff felt it could be completed by the end of the fiscal year or shortly thereafter; 4) there was a
o<-L(
Minutes
February 14, 1995
Page 5
proposal on Southbay Chevrolet that the Agency would feel acceptable and would be done shortly; 5) staff was in
the process of evaluating the feasibility of funding economic development with more participation by the general
fund and, therefore, could no give any indication on it at the present time; and, 6) staff had been directed to evaluate
the feasibility of eliminating or deferring all or some of the Agency C1P as a high priority and he felt they would
be returning with a one year CIP. He felt five of the six could produce results by the end of the fiscal year.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously,
4. REPORT REQUEST FROM AUTO PARK DEALERS FOR ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE - On 1/17/95, Council approved a conditional payout of $1.3 million to the Auto Park developers
for construction of [public streets within the Auto Park under Assessment District 92-2. On 1/19/95, staff met with
the Auto Park developers and their attorney to discuss financial problems associated with a lower Assessment
District payout than anticipated. SIaIT recommends this item be continued to the meetiDl! of 2/28/95,
(Community Development Director)
MSUC (FoxlHorton) to continue to the report to the regular meeting of the RDA on February 28, 1995,
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
OTHER BUSINESS
4. DIRECTOR'S REPORT(S) - None
5. CHAIR REPORT(S) - None
6. MEMBER COMMENTS
Member Rindone
8 Member Rindone questioned when ground breaking would begin at Third and "J' Street and what would
go into the old Lucky Market. He requested a written update.
ADJOURNMENT
ADJOURNMENT AT 9:19 P.M. to the Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting on February 21, 1995 at 6:00
p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers.
Respectfully submitted,
BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk
by: ':t
~-S
~ þ~£ blank!
:J---~~
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 3
Meeting Date 02/21/95
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: EXTENSION OF SUBLEASE FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 818 BROADWAY TO SOUTH BAY CHEVROLET CO.,
INC., AND MR. EDUARDO MARTORELL WITHOUT PUBLIC BIDDING
PURSUANT TO SECTION 33431 OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
LAW
Resolution Authorizing the Extension of Sublease for property
located at 818 Broadway to South Bay Chevrolet Co., Inc., and Mr.
Eduardo Martorell, and Authorizing the Chairman to Execute Same
SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director C,c;,
REVIEWED BY: Executive Directo~ mð~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes - No lU
BACKGROUND: The Redevelopment Agency acquired the leasehold interest in property
located at 818 Broadway from South Bay Chevrolet as part of the acquisition of that
dealership's Broadway properties for the Auto Park project. South Bay Chevrolet was given
a sublease to continue their used car sales on this site which expires on February 18, 1995.
The owners of South Bay Chevrolet have recently indicated their desire to continue to sell
used cars on this site and have requested that the Agency extend the sublease to the end of
the Agency's leasehold interest, June 30, 1997. The Agency has no other plans for this
property at this time.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency approve the resolution and authorize the Chairman to
execute the Extension of Lease,
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not Applicable
DISCUSSION:
The leasehold interest in property located at 818 Broadway was acquired by the Agency along
with the South Bay Chevrolet dealership property at 801 Broadway as part of the Auto Park
project, South Bay Chevrolet has been selling used cars on this site since 1982, At the time
of acquisition, South Bay Chevrolet assumed that all auto sales operations would be relocated
to their new Otay Valley Road location. However, due to the shortage of space at the new
dealership and the desire to maintain exposure on Broadway, the owners have decided to
continue to sell used cars from the Broadway site. Consequently, they have requested that
the Agency extend the lease for this property which expires on February 18, 1995.
This property, which comprises 36,000 square feet, currently leases for $2,968.74/month,
or $.08/square foot. South Bay Chevrolet continues to pay rent directly to the property
owners. There is no net loss or gain by the Agency. The current rent is considered to be
within market range (per staff research) and equivalent to rent on property the Agency
recently leased to Budget Rent-A-Car at 753 Broadway. The lease is therefore considered lli11
$-1
..-.....
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 02/21/95
to have bonus value in today's market. Consequently, no consideration for the extension of
the sublease is proposed,
There are currently no redevelopment proposals for this site, although several other used cars
sales businesses have expressed an interest in leasing the site if South Bay leaves. The
current lease runs until the July 1, 1997, at which time the Agency will have one five year
option to continue the lease until 2002. The Agency is thus responsible for the payment of
rent at least until July 1, 1997.
Extension of the sublease to South Bay Chevrolet will allow continuation of the same business
on the site which is similar to other automobile related businesses in the area. It will also
relieve the Agency from any loss of rental income from this site, Since the proposed action
does not result in any change in land use on the site, there is no environmental impact and
the action is exempt under CECA.
South Bay Chevrolet has informed us that they will add Mr. Eduardo Martorell to the sublease.
Mr, Martorell has been the owner of Monte Carlo Auto Sales, directly north of the subject site,
for the past thirteen years. He will be a partner in business with Messrs. Ordway and Reneau
(who will remain on the sublease) and will manage the used auto sales business on the site.
South Bay Chevrolet originally requested reassignment of the leasehold interest back to them.
However, the owners of the property would not agree to release the Agency from its
obligations under the lease to guarantee rental payment, so there was no incentive for the
Agency to transfer its interest in the property.
Under the terms of the Agency's lease, the Agency is required to receive written permission
from the owner of the property for any assignment or sublease. This has been requested
through the owners' attorney and we have been advised that the owners' permission will be
forthcoming.
Section 33431 of the Health and Safety Code requires that the Agency hold a public hearing
if Agency owned property is to be conveyed without competitive bidding, The sale of used
cars on this site has been ongoing since 1982 by South Bay Chevrolet, and continuation of
this business represents the best use of this site at this time. Further, the lease is not
considered to have any current "bonus" value and, therefor, extension of the sublease without
consideration is considered to be a market value transaction, For the foregoing reasons, staff
recommends the extension of the sublease without competitive bidding.
Continuation of the same land use on the site will assist in the elimination of blight through
the continuation of a viable business activity, In consideration of current commercial market
conditions, the alternative uses for the site would include a similar used auto sales/leasing
business or other auto related use.
FISCAL IMPACT: South Bay Chevrolet continues to pay full rent of the use of the site directly
to the owners, However, the Agency is ultimately responsible for the rent under the lease,
Should South Bay Chevrolet discontinue or miss a rental payment, the Agency would be liable
3<J,
--..
Page 3. Item ~
Meeting Date 02/21/95
for the payment. Extension of the sublease will relieve the Agency from any loss of rental
income while advertising for a new tenant.
Continuation of the current usage on the site will continue to produce sales tax revenues to
the City, currently estimated at $48,000 per year. The business currently employs six,
Attachments: Plat Map
[AK:IKASSMANIRA4S1818BWA Y .RA4J
3 ~_3
~ þ~E- Clank!
3-f
~" ro ,'0O, -
r-<\I I ,Ot71?17"?'ð'"
oJ) £666 V';d
':
I-!'.¡ -i?)U,
. ~ Œ ~ c~
I~ ~ /~~:~
"'" 0 -
I .~ ;; f16\
I~ ~ 5'(70;7/ ~ \J.Y
I ~ 7..0, Þ'rdk ~
I~ ~ -
I~.~ ú) "'r<õ'\ ~
iii !Q ~ \:'.J
I '<666~d N.,ð a;
I I "",/...ocrr",,@
I ~ U .
¡ --L , ~ tX ~
~VM Vèlèl31S I G'"
I --:- I ~
: ~ I~ ~ ~ ø~
! I:
" I~ ~ @~~
I~ .
I' >r ~ ~~
I ~ ~ ~;
~ CD:
I¥ ~ ~;;
~ u..'" ;::
<\Ir- CO
~<\I 1'\- ~ Œ
11 U T ~ <\I
(¡ì\c i
\.::)'"
.... )
~ u.J 0 "
fI V) ~
ce "
u.J ~'"
-' . ~
t;¡j ~
zu
~~ '"
ce"- :'
I IT s ¡
. c:: "-
u ceo
leu I-
0 ~'" V)
I ~ ~ú) ~ 0 ~
0 ZI- ~
I ~~
oy 09 081
I
~
- '.is - - - ~
: ~
I
I O/~-IL~ @ 3--Ç
.--... -.--
".
'.
BXHIBIT "A"
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The South 200 feet of the North 340 feet of the Easterly 240
feet of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Quarter
Section 165 of RANCHO DE LA NACION according to Map thereof No.
166 made by MORRILL filed in the Office of the County Recorder
of San Diego county.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion described as follows:
The Northerly 25 feet of said real property.
J\AO23311Z.NW4 EXHIBIT "A"
3~&
RESOLUTION 1445
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO
SUBLEASE EXTENDING THE TERM OFTHESUBLEASE FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
818 BROADWAY TO SOUTH BAY CHEVROLET CO.. INC.. AND ADDING MR,
EDUARDO MARTORELL AS A CO-SUBLESSEE THERETO. AND AUTHORIZING THE
CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE SAME
WHEREAS. the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political
subdivision of the State of California ("Agency"), has leased certain property located at 818
Broadway ("Site") in the City of Chula Vista and within the Southwest Redevelopment Project
Area; and,
WHEREAS. the Agency has subleased said property to South Bay Chevrolet Co., Inc"
("Sublessee") for the purpose of continuing the operation of a used car sales business on the
Site; and.
WHEREAS. the Agency's sublease with the Sublessee will expire on February 18,
1995; and,
WHEREAS. the Sublessee has requested that the Agency amend the sublease by
adding Mr, Eduardo Martorell as an additional sublessee to the lease so that they may
continue to operate their business on the Site and its extension to June 30, 1977; and,
WHEREAS. the Agency has determined that the amendment of its sublease in the
manner herein authorized will aid in the elimination of blighting influences in the project area
by assisting the continuation of an ongoing and successful business; and,
WHEREAS. Section 33431 of the Health and Safety Code permits the Agency to sell
or lease property without competitive bidding after duly noticing and holding a public hearing;
and.
WHEREAS. the sublease is being conveyed to the Sublessee for fair market value; and,
WHEREAS. the proposed action by the Agency is exempt from review under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under the general rule as outlined under Section
15061 of the State CEQA guidelines,
NOW THEREFORE. THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
does hereby find. order. determine and resolve as follows:
Section 1, The hearing required under Section 33431 of the Health and Safety Code
was duly called. noticed and all public comments, if any, concerning the proposed Assignment
of Sublease and leasehold Interest were made and received at said hearing.
Section 2. The Redevelopment Agency does hereby find that amendment of its
sublease herein authorized for the property located at 818 Broadway will reduce blighting
influences in the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area and is in the best interests of the
City,
-3-{
Resolution 1445
Page 2
Section 3, The Redevelopment Agency does hereby find that the Amendment of the
sublease for the property located at 818 Broadway is exempt from review under the California
Environmental Quality Act (CECA) under general rule as outlined under Section 15061 of the
State CECA guidelines.
Section 4, The Redevelopment Agency does hereby find that the consideration to be
paid for the Amendment of Sublease for the property located at 818 Broadway is not less
than fair market value.
Section 5, The Redevelopment Agency hereby approves the Amendment of the
Sublease to South Bay Chevrolet Co., Inc., and Mr. Eduardo Martorell. said document on file
in the Office of the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency known as RACO-95-xx, as may
be further modified with such minor clarifications thereto as may be deemed necessary by
Agency Counsel to effectuate the intent of the parties thereto, and authorizes the Chairman
to execute said Amendment of Sublease.
PRESENTED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
-e~ ~
Chris Salomone Bruce M. Boogaard
Community Development Director Agency Counsel
AK:KASSMANIRESOSI818BWA V.RES
3--7
._M- --
FEB 16 '95 09: 31AM PAOI'E CFLLAI-FIN P,~/7
FIRST AMENDMENT TO SUBLEASE
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO SUBLEASE (the "First Amendment"), effective
February -' 1995, is entered into between The Redevelopment Agency of tire City of ChuIa
Vista, a public body, corporate and poImc (the 'Sublessor"), South Bay Chevrolet Co" Inc, a
California cmporatum, David D, Ordway, CbrIstina L. Ordway, Travis A. RfJot.a1I, MargaTC'l
L, Reneau (collectively, the "Cw:;œot Sublcssee'), and Eduardo Martorell ("Mactorell"), with
respect to the following facts:
A. Sublessor Is !be le- UlIIkr an, IJ...u. \;ÇlloÜu It;,lðe (the 'Least") dated July 1, 1982, n
memorandum (the "MImllmI1II1t1ul ") of which has been recorded in the !:OOQrds of the San
Diego Recorder as J.>ocument No. 1993-0539625. Pursuant to the teJms of Ilutl telti\ltl
St:\ndard Industrial Sublease, daœd May 3. 199"\ (the .Subleasc.), a copy of whicb. Is
attached 811 Bxhibit .. A", SUblessor subleased the propertY which is the subject of the
Lease to the Current Sublesscc.
tj, TJ1c tenD ot the Subl..""" will """}Iu" Ull FtL.uuy 18, 199;, ~ &ublcs900 would
like to: (i) extend the term of the Sublease UJItil June 30, 1997, and (ü) add Manorell as
an additi<mal sublessee. Capitalized terms not defined in this First Amendment shall
have the same meaning as in the Sublease.
NOW, TRRREFORE, Sublc$$Qr, Current Sublessee and MartoreU agree as follows:
1. Am""dment of Sublease. Subject to the satisfaction of the condition precc:dcnt described
in Section 3(d), below, Sublessor, Current Sublessee and Martorell agree to amend the
Lease in the followiDg respects:
a. Section 1. - Parties, Section 1 of the Sublease is amended to provide that both
the CUrrent SUblessee and Martorell shall be the "Sublcsscc" ,
b, !:ootion ~ ,1. Term., Sectioø. 3.1 of tm- Snhl,..... ¡~ mMTIitPil to I".tfI'.M tl1e
Sublease temI to June 30, 1997,
1.':. Section 4 . Rent. Section 4 of the Sublease is amended to provide that the
Sublessee shaJ1 satisfy its obligations to pay rent to the Sublessor by payiog the same
directly to the Master Lessor,
2, Waiver of Certain Ri2hrs and Benefits, It is anticipated that, at some point in the future,
the Premises may, pul'SWIDt to an agreement wi1h (or other involvement of) SUblessor or
the City of Chula Vista (the "City"), become the subject of redevelopment. Such
xedevelopment may involve the condemnation of the Premises or other activities (short
of condemnation) which result in tbe requirement that Sublessee vacate the PremIses
~I!U I c::m>3.(1OZ I7.mU
-1-
3.~
FE8 16 '95 B9: 3~AM PAONE CALLAHA'i P,3/7
prior to the expiration of the term oftb.e Sublease (co11ec1ively, the "Relocation Events"),
In such event, Sublessee ag¡;ees that: (i) without additional couslderation
(provided, however, that Sublessee is provided at least sixty (60) calendar days wñtæn
notice to vacate the Premises), it shall consent to any such Relocation EventB and sba1l
cooperate fully in connection therewith (including, without limitation, executing any
docwne!l18 requesœd to evidence such cousc:nt), and (ii) that Sublessor's execution of this
First Amendment shall fully compensate Sublessee for: a) such consent and cooperation,
and b) any claims, causes of action and rigbt8 that Sublessee roay have, now or in the
future, known or unknown, in counectJ.on with the Relocation Events, including, without
limi.tation, claims for the taking of Sublessee's interest In the pre:miJ¡es, iInproven:reJJ1¡¡,
fixtures. fumiu=, trade fixtureII, equipment and other personal property, for loss of
goodwill, and for relocation benefits and moving expenses which Sublessee may
otherwise be en1it1ed to receive under applicable local, state t»: fedeJ:a1laws or regulations
(the "CIaims"). Effective upon execution of this First Amendment, Sublessee waives and I
relinquishes the Claims.
Further, In considaation of Sublessor's excçution of this First Amendment.
effective upon eœC\1tion of this First.An1e:ndment, Sublessee waives and relinquishes any
Ii.gIttB Sublessee may have under applicable laws, as a result of its owøersbip of any
interest in the Premises, to participate in any redevelopment of1be Premises or any other
particular property,
In fUJ:theranCe of tile intention described in this Section 2, Sublessee acknowledges
that it is familiar with Section 1542 of the Civil Code of the State of California, which
provides as follows:
"A general release does not extend to claims which the cteditor
does not know or suspect to exist in his favor at the time of
executing the release, which if known by him must have materially
affected his settk:ment with the debtor, "
Sublessee hereby waives and relinquishes any rights and benefits which it may
have under Section 1542.
3, MiscellaDcous.
a, ~. The signatories to this First Amendment warrant that they have the
authority to execute the same on behalf of tIæ principals they purport to represent. The
entity and individuals comprising tIæ Cuuent Sublcsscc warrant that they have not
previously assigned or sublet any interest under the Sublease.
W19o11 C31253.002! 2S!I21.1
-2-
3./û
FEB 16 '95 09: 33AM PFia'E CFLLAI-fIN P,4/7
b, Joint and Several Liabilitv, The liabili1ies under the Sublease, as !IJ.»ImIied by this
First Amendn1ent, shall be joint and several.
c, Bindim! on Successors. Without limiting the effect of the provisions in the
Sublease restricting assignment and sublettinS, the Sublease, as amended by this First
Amendment. imues to the benefit of, and is binding upon, the parties and their teSpCCtive
heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns.
d. Bindintl Effect. ~ to the extent expressly amended as provided above, the
Sublease (including without limitation, the provisions of Section 7 of the Addendum
thereto which incorporalc by reference portions of that certain Standard Industrial Lease -
Net, dated May 3, 1993, between Sublessor and Cu=nt Sublessee, a copy of which is
attached as Exhibit "B") shall remain in fUJl force and effect as originally written.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, as a condition precedent to the
effectiveness of Section 1 of this First Amendment. Sublessee shall deliver to Sublessor
cvid!:nce of the insurance required to be Jn3Intained by Sublessee under the terms of the
Sublease, in the form and IIII1DIlCr described therein.
c. Attomevs' Fees, The provisions of Section 11 of the Subb~" >}nill HpVly wlth
equal force and effect to this First Amendment,
\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\
120194/ C31:m.ooz /21921.2
-3-
3 -II
FEB 16 '9:) 09: 34FW1 PAONE CFU.FIH'IN P,5/7
DATED: February -' 1995 "SUBLESSOR"
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
Shirley Horton, Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
DATED: February -' 1995 By;
Broce M. Boogaard. Esq,
Agency General Counsel
DATED; F.::blua.t)' -' 1995 By,
Kenneth D. Johnson, Esq.
Agency Special Counsel
120194/ C312S30002/2S!!1.1..1
-4-
3-/;).
FEB 16 '95 Ø9;34AM PAONE CALLA-fAN P.6/?
"CURRENT SUBLESSEE"
DATED: February -' 1995
David D. Ordway
DATED: February -' 1995
Christina L. Ordway
DATED: FebJ:UarY -' 1995
TnviB A, Reneau
DATED: FebJ:UarY _t 1995
Margaxet L. Reneau
South Bay CbÞvro1ct Co" IDC,
DATED: February -' 1995 By:
By:
DATED: February -' 1995 "MARTORELL"
Eduardo Ma.noreU
IWI,.' <:3== /1.m2.>
-5-
3-f3
~ þa;Jg Clank!
3 -/1/
REDEVElOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT
Item~
Meeting Date 2/21/95
ITEM TITLE: REPORT - RESULT OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR SOUTH BAY
CHEVROLET SITE
SUBMITTED BY: Comm""',., D'"olopm,'" D~' ú'7 .
REVIEWED BY: Executive Directo~G ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes - No ~J
'../? Council Referral Number: -
BACKGROUND: The Agency issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the South Bay
Chevrolet property in October with a due date of November 29, 1994 for redevelopment
proposals. Two proposals were received which are described below. The proponents have
been invited to this evening's meeting to further describe their proposal or answer any
questions the Agency may have.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Agency direct staff to continue to
investigate alternatives for the reuse of this site including the interim lease for all or a portion
of the site for used car sales and repair. This could provide both rental and sales tax revenues
to the Agency and City until market conditions improve.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The Agency acquired the South Bay Chevrolet property at 801 Broadway in August 1993 as
part of the property exchange for the Auto Park project. The dealership, including 3.9 acres
of land and 30,800 square feet of buildings was valued at $3.4 million. The value was
predicated upon a 1990 appraisal which attributed $2.7 million to land value and an additional
$700,000 in building value required by the owners/dealers to make relocation to the new auto
park financially feasible. Since that time, the market for commercial properties has declined
considerably throughout the region.. Consequently, the current value of the property is much
lower as evidenced by the proposals received.
The dealership site is bordered on the south and east by a nursery (see attached map). This
property, which has minimal improvement, could add four acres to the dealership parcel
making it suitable for development as a neighborhood shopping center.
There have been several redevelopment proposals for the larger (8 acre) site in the past
including FarMor Drug Store, Food-4-Less, and Central Electric, (a general merchandiser from
Los Angeles). None of these proposals reached fruition (Food-4-Less eventually developed
on Sweetwater Road).
At this time, the market is somewhat limited. In addition to the proposals received in
response to the RFP, there appears to be interest from used car sales/repair businesses to
locate in the general vicinity. Telephone inquiries have been received to lease or purchase the
subject site to establish auto sales and service businesses. However, only two written
proposals were received in response to the RFP. These are further described below.
1- /
Page 2, Item ~
Meeting Date 2/21/95
Robert J. Kolkev/Housina DeveloDment ProDosal
Mr. Kolkey, and his architect Homer Delawie, propose to design and develop 48 semi-attached
townhomes, two and three bedroom, on the site. There is the possibility of expanding
development to the nursery parcel for an additional four acres of housing at a later date.
Mr. Kolkey contends that housing is the best use of the site due to lack of a market for
commercial developments and contiguous housing to the east.
Mr. Kolkey proposes that, in order to provide housing for low/moderate income families in a
$100,000 to 120,000 price range, the Agency housing fund will have to provide a grant to
the Agency to cover the cost of the land. The Agency would also have to demolish the
structures on the property and undertake any required cleanup of contaminated soils. The
land would be "donated" to the project to provide lower cost housing.
The benefits of this proposal to the Agency lie in the provision of low/moderate income
housing. Financial benefits would be limited to tax increments accruing from the project. The
Agency would not receive any revenue from sale of the land, although it may be possible to
transfer funds from the low/mod fund back into the redevelopment fund to cover land cost.
This will lower the cost of housing to reach low/moderate income levels. There would be no
sales tax revenue.
The project would, however, provide a relief from the strip commercial development along
Broadway and compliment the business home project, just one block to the north. This may
provide more of a sense of "community" along Broadway.
Mr. Anael Concheso/Refurbish Existina Buildina for Sale of Used Cars and Auto ReDair Center
Mr. Concheso proposes to purchase the site for $900,000 with $300,000 down and the
remainder financed over ten years at 8%.
Existing buildings would be refurbished within thirty days after close of escrow. The property
would be used as a used car sales lot and auto repair center. As such, it would not be a
material change in land use from its historic use.
Benefits to the Agency include the receipt of $900,000 vis-a-vis an installment sale and sales
tax revenues estimated at $3,200 monthly based upon sale of forty automobiles with an
average sales price of $8000. (These estimates have been provided by the applicant and may
be slightly higher.) In addition, the Agency would forego the expense of demolition.
Conclusions
There is an additional interest in the site (although no proposals were received) for use as a
sales lot for used cars and trucks on a purchase or lease basis. Lease of the property may
have merit if the Agency cannot negotiate a reasonable price and wishes to "Iandbank" the
property until market conditions and, consequently, redevelopment opportunities improve.
However, it would be inappropriate to negotiate with other potential users until the Agency
has made a determination concerning the respondents to the RFP.
1/-;)
Page 3, Item ~
Meeting Date 2/21/95
Of the two proposals received, the commercial proposal is clearly the most beneficial in terms
of revenue. However, the price offered is approximately $5/sq. ft., or less than one third of
the acquisition price. Saving the cost of demolition could add a dollar/sq. ft. to this amount.
The housing proposal is interesting from the standpoint of total redevelopment of the site and
breaking up the continuous strip commercial development along Broadway. The proposed
project offers mixed affordable housing benefits. It would provide for sale-housing product
that would be affordable to some families at or near the top of the low income family range
(at or below 80% of median income). It would provide low-income housing on the west side
of 1-805, which is less desirable than having it on the east side of 1-805, in terms of balancing
the distribution of affordable housing; however, it would provide for-sale product rather than
rental product, which would be desirable on the west side. Of greatest concern is the amount
of subsidy required in comparison to the resources available. If the Low and Moderate Income
Housing Fund of the Agency is used to subsidize the total cost of contribution of the land and
clearance to the developer, the cost to the fund is estimated to be $1-1.2 million (depending
on land valuation). The City and the Agency are pursuing several other high priority housing
projects that will require significant subsidy, such as the Trolley Terrace housing/day care
project, the proposed Bridge Housing/South Bay Community Services/EastLake low-income
apartment project, McMillin Affordable Housing Agreement, and the First-Time Homebuyer
Program. Funding the proposal on the South Bay Chevrolet site would make is very difficult
to accomplish these projects and other upcoming projects that may offer a greater degree of
affordable housing benefit. Under better market conditions this corner site should have
greater value for commercial reuse.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Agency paid $3.4 million for the South Bay Chevrolet site. The price
was based upon a 1991 appraisal estimating land value at that time at approximately $15.60
sq. ft., and a valuation placed upon the improvements by the owners of approximately
$700,000. Market conditions have changed considerably since the time of appraisals.
Currently, demand for commercial sites is low and commercial land values have plunged.
Market conditions will improve, although it may take several years to reach 1991 price levels.
The Urban League is currently using space in the dealership building for the operation of an
oil recycling educational program with the understanding that they will have to relocate when
the Agency finds a developer for the site. They are not currently paying rent.
The Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund has a current balance of $650,404 and annual
revenues of approximately $900,000. The Federal HOME Program gives the City an annual
block grant type award of approximately $700,000. Its current balance is approximately
$330,000.
Attachments: Plat Map
RFP from Robert J. Kolkey
RFP from Angel Concheso
ISS/disk#5/S0BA YRFP.RA41
</:3
~ þ~E- blank!
- 1-1
;;
BROADWAY '"
ì N.o
,~ ~
I~
,I~
"
I
I 140
, .fi;:\ )
"V c
,~ -
') (I) )
i~ ;
I ~
J ~ @ >' -
..¡ Ô efÕl'\ ~
~ ()1 ",\ØJ '" c
I n A~S~N ç
~ ~ [
30 ~ 2.30 100 '4 )
U ;
~ .
~ @~
.
I ~ CEDAR @ ;
(/ @' i
@~ ~
r
t
m N 140.0'
. ~
PM2'.5 "'SO ~". . .~
".. ¡¡¡is< 57 ;~:"~t
\ ~@'" ~ rü;\ @ > ~ ŒJ "'. ,
~~,,"'~g:~, :' 'MJ'~' .
~, ~ ~ t ;. ,,@.< (j) I
~ ~~ ",' ~. "'~ ':-;
~ ~ ~ ~ ~::o I
. "ŒJ"IT!'
,.. ~@ @-~ ~. n~ ': IT!
¡~ ~ ~ ~ "".'2 ;-;
"~:" t ~ ~ ~O ~ @ &
'~:. r S6 ~ 57 :::: :J.JO SO
[ Plat Map) --:;;"", @
4-s
~ þ~E- Clank!
1- ~
~ ROBERT J. KOLÍŒY
3320 1bird Avenue He "'~,
San Diego, CA92103 /.:,v .~.
Post Office Box 82664 ""'" ~
,..... NDV
San Diego, CA 92138 !~.
:",. :~! '
\';0, : Co;:".,. "i' , ' it,
PHONE:(619) 291-3320 . ," FAX: (619) 299-8605
E
November 28, 1994
Mr. David GUstafson
Assistant Director of Community Development
City of Chula Vista
Community Development Department
278 Fourth Ave.
Chula Vista, Ca~ifornia 91910
Re: Proposed development of a 3.97 acre parcel
located at 801 Broadway, Chula Vista
A.P.N. 572-270-51. 54.' & 6Q
Dear Mr. Gustafson:
On behalf of Aaron H. Kolkey and Marty KOlkey of Cameo
Development, Homer Delawie of Delawie Wilkes Rodrigues Barker &
Bretton, and myself, we thank you and Mr. "Arroyo for meeting with
us on October 26 regarding the development of the above mentioned
property.
Our interest in this property is for development of low
cost housing for sale, consistent with the San Diego Association
of Government's reporting on housing element progress, dated
August 15,1994. We agree with you that more commerciaL
development along Broadway is not feasibly economical at this
time, despite it's potential revenue advantages to the City.
Our proposed for sale low cost housing development on
the subject site does Comply with the true meaning and intent of
the RFP, providing:
(a) c?nsistency with the surrounding developments,
land Use and design
(b) financial benefits to the City and
Redevelopment Agency through tax revenues
(c) over 100 years combined experience between us
in design and residential development
(d) local lenders who have already indicated their
interest in financing this proposed for sale under market housing
project.
As we discussed, in order to make a project of this
type economically viable, there must be made available a grant, .
under Redevelopment Agency provisions, to COVer the land costs. I
We propose that the City sell the land to us at a price that they
1-(
~
Mr. David Gustafson
Assistant Director of Community Development
November 28, 1994
Page 2
determine, which price would then covered by the grant. In order
to offer housing at below market and low income guidelines the
land must be obtained free and clear. The site must also be
cleared and must be hazard free. We will also need some relief
from the city's imposed fees for this type of development.
Assistance will also be needed in the area of any Master Plan
Amendment or rezone, including school fees in excess of the state
allowed limits.
Our present plan is to offer two types of units: a
1,200 sq. ft. unit with 2 bedrooms, 2~ baths, 2 car garage, two
stories, to sell 'for an estimated $101,900, and a 1,350 sq. ft. 3
bedroom, 2~ bath, 2 car garage, two stories, to sell for an
estimated $118,900.
Enclosed is a statement of findings and tentative site
plan regarding this proposal from the Architectural and Planning
firm of Delawie Wilkes Rodrigues Barker & Bretton.
We will contact you again shortly after you have had
the opportunity to review this proposal. Please do not hesitate
to contact us in the meantime if you have any questions or
comments. Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
~~4Í
Rober. Kolk y
Developer
If - Y
;/" 4;"':~ ~L'~; ; 8"~ i m;
" $° + 8>
P:J " ó' '
IV . 0.9
f" DEe 1994 ~
. :;:;, Received '¡;i. PROPOSAL TO PURCHASE , CJI[~):;~:~J1td .
~ .-~-
'1' Department.,(¡' 801 Broadway
~ ~ Chula Vista, ca 91910
-?;:> g"
,~~
1. conceptual plan to remain as an used car lot and auto repair center.
-- However, It.will be completely remodeled and improved to the point:'
of showing pride of ownership, with the present structure to remain
the same.
2. The sale of thIs property would be to Mr, Angel Concheso. Mr. Concheso
would bring In a selling agency to manage and operate the dealership.
Agency to be named upon acceptance of this offer.
'3. The projected financial benefits to the CIty and the selling agencywouid
be as follows:
"
A. Projected sales of used cars per month Is 40 with an
average selling cost of $8,000.
The City would receive 7% of the $8,000 selling price.
Example: $8,000 x 7% = $550 x 40 = $22,400.
B, The City would benefit because the new dealership would
create about 25 new job, with annual earnIng of $25,000.
ThIs would equal buyer new power of $625,000, per year,
C, The City agency would no longer have a vacancy property
to maIntain,
The City agency would receive Monthly payments of $7,280.
per month, This mean the agency would receive annual
Interest Income of $48,000 and a return of their principle
of $39,355.92 per year.
4. Mr. Angel concheso Is offering to purchase 801 Broadway for a purchase
price of $900,000. wIth a cash down of $300,000. at the close of escrow.
A. The terms of the offer to be as fOllows:
The cIty agency to carry the balance In the form of a First Trust
Deed and Note. The Interest Rate to be Fixed at 8% and the
$600,000 note to be amortized over 10 years and monthly
princIpal and Interest payments to be $7,279.66.
5. Remodeling to begin 30 days after the close of escrow. The escrow
period to be no longer then 60 days.
SIncerely, ~ ~~
Mr, Angel COnc so For Guatemala.
Please, contract Mr Gilbert Martinez, at 355 thIrd ave. ste.107, Chula Vista, ca
Phone I (6191 422-5511 t .orginal send to City agencY"1
f- 1
-.
~ F9E; Clank!
If -/()