Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1990/05/03 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, May 3, 1990 Council Chambers 7:05 D.m. Public Services Buildin,! ROLL CALL MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Cox; Members Moore, McCandliss Nader and Malcolm MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Deputy City Manager Morris; Community Development Director Salomone; Assistant City Attorney Fritsch; City Engineer Swanson CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 2 through 5) Item 3 and 4 were pulled from the Consent Calendar. THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR (ITEMS 2 AND 5) WAS OFFERED BY MEMBER McCANDLISS, the reading of t~e tex~ was waived by unanimous consent, passed and was approved~ (The vote was 4-0; Member Malcolm was not present for the vote~) 2~ RESOLUTION 1074 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH VAN DYKE & ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED SERVICES FOR MARINA VIEW PARK MASTER PLAN At its November 16, 1989 meeting~ the Redevelopment Agency approved a master plan for Marina View Park, which was prepared by the landscape architectural firm of Van Dyke & Associates~ Inc~ A new agreement with the landscape architect is needed for further design development~ preparation of construction drawings and bid documents~ and related services~ 5~ RESOLUTION 1075 INSTRUCTING TRUSTEE TO RELEASE CERTAIN FUNDS FROM THE SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL CENTER BONDS The Agency sold revenue bonds on behalf of the County in order to finance the Sou%h County Regional Center in 1978~ From time to timed 'the County has requested that the Agency authorize the Trustee to release bond reserve funds for various purposes. Recently, several incidents have occurred at the South Bay Jail located in the South County Regional Center~ Certain capital improvements are necessary in order to prevent these occurrences in the future° The County Board of Supervisors requested a release of an additional $494,000 from the remaining Bond Construction Fund in order to complete the necessary capita] improvements~ END OF CONSENT CALENDAR Redevelopment Aqency Minutes -2- May 3, 1990 PUBLIC MEETING 6. PUBLIC MEETING on Otay Valley Road Median Configuration REPORT on Status of Otay Valley Road Widening Project Principal Community Development Specialist Putnam reported that at the Agency meeting on February 15, 1990, staff was directed to develop an alternative median configuration for Otay Valley Road to facilitate truck movements into and out of properties located both north and south of Otay Valley Road. The major change that staff proposed in response to Agency direction was to delete the medians between 1-805 and Brandywine Avenue along Otay Valley Road. Ms. Putnam further reported that on March 26, 1990, this item was taken back to the Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee (PAC). A~i of the adjacent property owners were notified of the PAC meeting and were invited to provide their input. No objections were raised to the proposed median configuration other than some objections from PAC members. The PAC voted 3-1 to recommend the modified median configuration. They feel that the configuration is reasonable in the short term, but they stated that in their opinion the final solution is going to require an alternative circulation system south of Otay Valley Road, reconfigurations of the driveways on the north side of Otay Valley Road and alternative access to the properties north of Otay Valley Road from an access drive off of Brandywine Avenue. The dissenting PAC member expressed the concern that a median should be included in the initial phase of roadway construction to avoid causing a traffic bottleneck near 1-805. Chairman Heye was not present at the PAC meeting; a letter regarding the median issue from Chairman Heye was distributed to Agency members. Associate Civil Engineer Hanson stated that based on the meeting with the PAC and the last Redevelopment Agency meeting, staff redesigned the median configuration and provided a continuous left turn lane between the freeway and Brandywine Avenue. This will provide on an interim basis property owners on both the north and south side of the road the ability to make left hand turns into their properties. It is staff's recommendation that the median be constructed from Brandywine easterly. The design overall includes landscaping, conduit for future traffic signals~ six-lane roadway~ 16-foot wide median, curb, gutter and sidewalk, street lights, and underground utilities. Member McCandliss stated that at the last meeting concerning this issue, in addition to coming back with a reconfigured median, it was her understanding the Agency asked staff to provide direction on policy statements that would be set to allow for a transition into the full median and she did not see that included in the staff report. Redevelopment Aqenc¥ Minutes -3- May 3 1990 Mr. Hanson pointed, out that in the staff report alternate access to the properties on the north side will be off of Brandywine Avenue. Ultimately, the City will be looking at signals at Oleander, Brandywine, Nirvana, Maxwell and Roma Court ~ He added that the ultimate plan is to have alternative traffic circulation to the south of Otay Valley Road. Responding to questions, Ms. Putnam stated it is presumed that the PAC recommendations for an ultimate solution would be worked on by staff. When traffic volumes reach the necessary level, a median would be put in Chairman Cox questioned how the additional median island work would be paid for~ Mr~ Hanson stated staff will be coming to the Redevelopment Agency meeting on 5/17/90 with an update regarding the hiring of a consultant to look into the financial feasibility study for the actual construction of Otay Valley Road. The actual assessments to the various property owners are undetermined at this time until that study is completed. Chairman Cox asked if it would be the intent to include the ultimate cost of the median island° Mr. Hanson responded all items involved in the road construction will be addressed as part of the feasibility study~ Ms. Putnam stated that if it is the Agency's direction, staff will look at financing the part of the median between 1-805 and Brandywine as part of the financial feasibility study. Vince Davies~ 4501 Otay Valley Road~ Chula Vistas commented that by having the roadway double striped with a left turn lane~ all the problems have been solved except two~ Firsts he noted concern with ho~ far up Maxwell a truck will have to climb in order to make a U- turn~ Second, the proposed configuration has not figured out how a truck is going to come into his property and be able to turn left when it comes back out onto Otay Valley Road. He questioned how long it will be before the median is deemed necessary~ Mr Rosenberg responded that generally speaking the street could function to a range of around 25~000 vehicles a day~ Presently the k"oadway carries about 18~000; it may be a 5 year period before the median would be required~ Member Nader asked if there is any reason why there could not be a gap in the ultimate median that would ~liow a truck making a left onto Otay Valley Road out of Mr~ Davies" property to do so. City Engineer Swanson stated he believes it may be possible to come to a compromise solution that would solve everyone's problem~ At this point he is not aware of any technical, infeasibility that would prohibit this. Leonard Teyssier~ 490 Otay Valley Road~ Chula Vista~ stated he represents the property where Pacific Telephone Company is located~ Redevelopment Aqenc¥ Minutes -4- May 3~1990 The omission of the raised island solves their current problem at this time~ Ultimately, they would need a stop light at this location. John Gregory, 515 Otay Valley Roads Chula Vista, (JT Racing) noted he concurs with everything recommended° He wanted to take this opportunity to bring up the issue of speeding on Otay Valley Road. Donald R~ Heye, 1685 Brandywine Avenue, Chula Vista, (Chairman of the PAC) stated he does not think anyone can deny that having a raised landscaped median is very important to the image of the project area~ This is the entrance to the project area. He feels it is important in terms of safety to have the raised median and it is important in terms of image to have it there. Mr. Heye commented regarding Mr. Davies' property, noting his problem with trucks turning out. The problem is that Mr. Davies' has never received permission to park trucks on his property. Therefore, Mr. Heye suggests not to allow the trucks to go in and out (it is an illegal use of the property). Mr. Heye believes the issue of the use of that property needs to be addressed~ Regarding the property owned by Mr. Teyssier where Pacific Telephone is located, Oleander directly intersects that property. It is very easy to get in and out of that property by moving the gate. Regarding JT Racing~ Mro Heye commented it is a very nice improvement for the area, however, the property owners did not provide for internal circulation of trucks. They have overused the property~ He does not feel they should be subsidized. Member Moore commented he is ready to move forward with this project. He believes it may not be ideal but a decent compromise has been reached. Member McCandliss commented she does not feel the businesses that have already located in this area can be ignored; it is necessary to recognize the conditions that e×ist~ She believes the Agency should move forward with the recommendations in the staff report with the additional comments of the PAC. Member Malcolm questioned if it is correct that further modifications will be brought back to the Agency at a later date for part of the turning movements. Mr. Hanson stated that until future developments come into the area, staff will be proceeding with the street improvements as outlined in the staff report. Member Malcolm recalled that on a 5-0 vote of the Agency, all agreed with Mr. Heye's statement that there has been an increased use of Mr. Davies' property; that it probably has not been done properly with permits and that the Agency directed staff to look into that. Part of his decision tonight is going to be based on that fact. Member Malcolm further commented the area is a failure; it is not well; it is not beautiful. A road system needs to be designed to fit the proper land uses and not put in a road system that will need to be changed at a later date. He does not have Redevelopment Aqenc¥ Minutes -5- May 3,1 990 a problem in trying to accommodate Mr. Davies' business~ however, the time is going to come when that use will come to question because it is not the type of asset wanted at the entry of a redevelopment area. He does not want to build something that does not fit what he perceives to be the ultimate goal for the area. Member McCandliss commented the recommendations of staff seem to be appropriate but only with the requirements that a mechanism be put in place that would allow the eventual long term medians in the area. Chairman Cox commented this is a redevelopment district that has suffered to a certain extent from a situation of benign neglect from the Agency~ Not because of a lack of interest, but there have been other redevelopment projects that have had more focus and more attention~ He believes there has been an effort from the beginning to not only see a change in land use but to beautify the area, to clean it up and to eliminate the blight. He believes a part of that is going to be addressed by the improvements on Otay Valley Road and he includes in the improvements the landscaping which is an integral part~ He is delighted to see the unanimous support from all the property owners that are to the east of Ma×well. If the Agency did go along with the staff recommendation~ he would want to ensure that the design is completed now for the ultimate landscaping improvements because those improvements ought to go back to 1-805. There should be a reasonable time frame in which those improvements are put in. At this point he would want to ensure that the funding would be a part of the overall assessment so that when the Agency is ready to move forward to put in the landscaped median islands the money would be available~ MOTION MSC (Co×/McCandliss) to accept the staff report with the additional caveats to do the design for the entire length of the median island from 1-805 beyond Nirvana7 to allow as an interim step the painted median between 1-805 to Brandywine; to include in the assessments for this roadway the costs of the median island from Brandywine back to 1- 805; and a time limit of either 5 years or whenever the property on the south side of Otay Valley Road is improved as being the mechanism to move fo~ard with those improvements (whichever comes first). Staff to work with property owners who are affected with access problems to determine what other solutions might be addressed to accommodate their needs. (The vote was 4-17 Member Malcolm opposed~) 7~ ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. 8. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR: RedeveloDment Aqency Minutes -6- May 3, 1990 3~ RESOLUTION 1076 ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-90-29 AND APPROVING AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH GIRARD FINA/~CIAL CORPORATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF FIVE INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS ON TWO SEPARATE PARCELS AT THE NORTHEASTERLY AND NORTHWESTERLY CORNERS OF MAXWELL AND OTAY VALLEY ROADS WITHIN THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA Girard Financial Corporation submitted a proposal to construct five industrial buildings, totalling 72,000 square feet on two separate parcels at the northeasterly and northwesterly corners of Maxwell and Otay V~lley Roads within the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area. Member McCandliss questioned what percentage of the new construction has been spec buildings~ Mr. Kassman responded that with the exception of SDG&E, Hyspan and JT Racing, it has all been spec building. Member McCandliss further asked if the appl~cant has any commitments for tenants at this point. Mr. Bob Schroeder, 4320 La Jolla Village Drive, San Diego, representing the applicant, stated the applicant does not have any commitments from tenants at this time. Member Malcolm complimented Girard Financial and staff regarding this project~ He noted this building has been the most sensitive to the area in terms of parking ratio and landscaping percentages~ RESOLUTION OFFERED BY MEMBER MALCOI~, the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent. Member Moore questioned if conditions were added to restrict the type of vehicles that would be utilized in this area. Principal Planner Lee stated this was discussed by the Design Review Committee (DRC) o One of the DRC members indicated a concern for the northerly building in terms of access through that area~ however, the building has so much parking involved, until specific users are in there, staff agreed with the applicant that it would be easy to re-stripe the area and organize it depending on the user. There is adequate room in terms of loading areas° Member Moore further questioned anticipated noise issues. Mr. Lee stated there is no residential area in the immediate vicinity~ Member McCandliss stated she is pleased to see the design and materials and feels it will be a quality building° She suggested that as part of the marketing that a variety of businesses be looked at, hoping for a greater variety and more up-scale operations° She would like to have a report come to 'the Agency looking at the land that is still available in the Redevelopment Area, looking at the percentage ~edevelopment Aqency Minutes -7- May 3, 1990 of spec buildings and looking at some of the tenants to get a better picture of what is being accomplished in the area. Chairman Cox commented one of the concerns he has always had with this property is how the western end would be handled. He believes the applicant has done an excellent job~ VOTE ON THE RESOLUTION The resolution passed and was approved unanimously° MOTION MSC (McCandliss/Cox) request a report back on the configuration of the Redevelopment Area; the properties that are still vacant; percentage of spec buildings; square feet; listing of uses that have been brought into the area~ (The vote was 4-0; Member Malcolm was not present for the vote~) 4. REPORT: SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA At its meeting of March 15, 1990 the Agency considered the boundaries proposed by staff and the redevelopment consulting firm of Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc~ (RSG) for the new Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. The Agency directed staff to submit the project boundaries to the Montgomery Planning Committee. This Committee considered the new project area boundaries at its meetings of March 21 and April 4, 1990. It was recommended that the Agency accept the report and (1) direct staff to bring the identified areas for inclusion in the new redevelopment area to the City Planning Commission or adoption of proposed project area boundaries and the preliminary redevelopment plan; and (2) direct staff to begin he process of expanding the existing survey area to include the area east of Banner Avenue in the new project area~ Mr. Carlos Flores~ Rosenow Spevacek Group, highlighted the differences in 'the proposed project area boundaries since the last time the Agency formally considered this project° Member McCandliss asked questions concerning residential areas selected for inclusion in the project area. Mr. Flores confirmed that the areas selected were included because public infrastructure improvements would be required. He confirmed that this was the rationale for including the Woodlawn Park (Broderick Acres) area. Member McCandliss questioned the theme or rationale for including or excluding certain areas~ Mr. Flores responded that blighted conditions that would be appropriate for redevelopment were considered~ Community Development Director Salomone pointed out the Redevelopment Aqenc¥ Minutes -8- May 3, 1990 residential areas were added through the committee process; they were not the original recommendation of the consultant° Member McCandliss questioned if either the residents or the business/property owners have any idea that they are being considered for inclusion in a redevelopment area at this point in time° Mr. Flores responded other than the fact it has been presented to the Montgomery Planning Committee and Otay Town Committee, no~ It is difficult to do this until boundaries are set. Throughout the process of establishing a redevelopment district~ once the boundaries are set, there would be public information generated~ Mr~ Frank Spevacek~ Rosenow Spevacek Group, distributed a copy of a flow chart setting forth the time line involved in creating a redevelopment project area. The process is at the very beginning stage at this point. If preliminary approval is received on the boundaries at this meeting, then staff and consultants would start moving forward with the actual redevelopment plan adoption process~ They will then move forward with consideration by 'the Planning Commission on May 23~ and be back before the Agency on June 7 to receive authorization of the transmittal of the Preliminary Redevelopment Plan which would officially initiate the redevelopment project adoption process. Once that process is initiated they then must notify all residential property owners~ all property owners, all business tenants and business owners within the boundaries of this area to identify that (1) the Agency is initiating this process and (2) that the Agency would be setting up a Project Area Committee specific for this redevelopment project to advise the Agency on the redevelopment program and redevelopment plan~ Mr. Salomone added that a number of ways comld be found to go beyond the noticing requirement to inform the public of the proposed redevelopment project. Member Moore suggested the Community Development Director develop a recommendation of how to notify the public, when it should be done, etc~ Mr~ Spevacek stated the law has changed~ plus court cases have created additional procedures for forming a Project Area Committee (PAC) which requires that the representatives of the PAC be elected by their peers. One or more PAC information meetings will be held to describe what is being done, who is involved~ and the fact that a PAC is being created and how that creation activity would take place. After one or more of those meetings, a final meeting will be held at which time the community would elect their PAC members. Staff and consultants will bring to the City Council the noticing procedures~ the contents of the notice, and the procedures to form the Project Area Committee prior to a mail out to the public. Member Moore would like the intentions of the Agency to also be included as part of the package for mailing to the public~ Redevelopment Aqenc¥ Minutes -9- May 3, 1991; Mr~ Spevacek continued that the milestone dates to be looked at are in July to have the City Council affirm the PAC membership. In September the Agency would authorize transmittal of all documents that would be involved in the formation of the redevelopment area which then starts a second phase of review by the public~ PAC, taxing agencies, etc. If no fiscal review is called for~ a recommendation from the PAC would be received Jn October and a potential public hearing on November 13~ If a fiscal review is called for by a taxing agency~ then the public hearing would be pushed into January 1991. The law provides that the size of a redevelopment project area can be decreased up until the time the area is considered by the City Council adopting the redevelopment program~ If during the process it is deemed appropriate to add properties to the project area then it would be necessary to go back to the first step again. Mr~ Salomone commented that the Agency is beginning a process of intense public input. From the public input to date there is controversy surrounding many elements of redevelopment; among those are eminent domain~ the amount of residential property included, the implementation process and economics. Staff is asking the Agency to start the intense public review; save decisions on the critical items to later in the process after receiving public input. He believes the message the Agency would want to convey during the public process is that there would be modest expectations in this area~ he does not think there will be a lot of progress immediately or in the first few years~ Member McCandliss commented she could support moving forward on the areas designated~ Before this moves much further, she would like to have guidelines or parameters be established regarding the residential areas~ By including Woodlawn Park~ she believes there is an advantage of using some of the financial tools of the Redevelopment Agency in order to accomplish improvements~ however~ at the same time she would like to do everything possible to allay the concerns of the residents there that the Agency is not going to begin condemning properties~ that the Agency will not proceed without the involvement of the people in the residential area~ She would like to see staff work on a package using the resources of the Montgomery Planning Committee to better convey the Agency's intention by including this area as part of a redevelopment distr~ct. Member Nader noted that at each time the prospect of including residential areas in the redevelopment district has been discussed he has made the point that '~unfriendly,, eminent domain of a residential property that would result in involuntarily displacing someone from their home is something he would not consider. If residential areas are included as part of the redevelopment project and residents are assured that it is the policy of the A§ency that this will not occur~ lit should allay the fears expressed by Member McCandliss. Redevelopment Aqenc¥ Minutes -10- May 3, 1990 ~'!~ Chairman Cox commented that the previous action of the Agency was that to the maximum extent possible "unfriendly" eminent domain of a residential property would not occur. One example where it may be a necessity to look at condemnation is the area west of I-5 (West Fairfield) where there is a poor mixture of land use that barring redevelopment would not be rectified. Member Nader stated he does not believe that redevelopment must take the form of removing people from their homes~ He is suggesting that there be a line drawn as to under what circumstances the Agency would consider using eminent domain~ Ms. Lee Wheeland~ Chair of the Montgomery Planning Committee~ commented regarding the flow chart presented earlier in 'the meeting showinq the time line involved in the redevelopment process~ She wanted to be sure the Montgomery Planning Committee was included in the process~ The Committee is very concerned about the Main Street/I- 805 corridor~ she wanted to call this area to the attention of the Agency~ MOTION MS (Cox/Moore) to add the following areas for consideration in the survey area: the area west of Broadway and South of L Street that is not highlighted on the map; include the area immediately to the west and south of the $DG&E property identified on the map erroneously marked as the City of San Diego~ include those areas that are south of the hiwhlighted area in the O'tay River Valley; look at the Main Street area to connect two areas7 the area on Main Street immediately to the west of Industrial Boulevard include the full street° The Agency recessed at this time. Member Nader announced that he has recently purchased property that borders property being considered for inclusion in the redevelopment area~ Until this meeting~ there was a parcel that was never included in previous discussion on this matter~ That parcel is bordered by K Street on 'the north~ Broadway on the west and S~erra on the soUtbo Mr~ Nader~s property borders the proposed parcel. This presents him with a conflict of interest on that parcel. Earlier in the meeting~ Chairman Cox indicated that init£ally the Agency would discuss only that part of the area proposed south of L Street~ He understood in speaking with staff that it would not pose a problem in considering areas south of L Street separately from areas north of L Street. It has now been brought to his attention that this would pose a problem; the areas are intertwined. He wanted to emphasize that over the last several months in discussing this issue~ his participation in discussion pertained to a project area ghat did not include this parcel~ On the advice of the attorney~ until clarification can be Redevelopment Aqenc¥ Minutes -11- May 3, 1990 obtained from the FPPC, he will abstain from voting and further discussion. VOTE ON THE MOTION The motion passed. (The vote was 3-0; Member Malcolm was not present for the vote; Member Nader abstained°) MS (Cox/McCandliss) accept the balance of the staff recommendation. Amendment to the Motion Member McCandliss added an amendment to the motion to direct staff to identify the residential areas included within the redevelopment district; after reviewing the conditions of the area and the Agency's proposed intentions by including that area within the redevelopment district~ that they bring back to the Agency for consideration some designs or limitations, statements of control over the use of redevelopment in that area and condemnation° Chairman Cox included this amendment as part of his motion. VOTE ON THE MOTION The motion carried. (The vote was 3-0; Men,her Malcolm was not present for the vote; Member Nader abstained~) Member McCandliss stated she would like to have a report on this come back to the Agency as soon as possible. MOTION MSC (Moore/Cox) direct staff to prepare additional efforts that the Agency and/or staff will accomplish to reduce undue fears as it pertains to redevelopment; draft for the Agency review in time for the mailing with the first notice of intent of the redevelopment action to property owners and tenants (residential and commercial) as set forth in the redevelopment laws~ (The vote was 3-0~ Member Malcolm was not present for the vote; Member Nader abstained~) City Engineer Swanson stated the City specifications on contracts ~'equire that a contractor maintain insurance with a company rated "A" or better from the Best Insurance Raters. The contractor on the Third Avenue project started the project under those conditions. After completing approximately 75% of the work, his insurance company cancelled him at which time the work had to be stopped. He was only able to get insurance under a "B" rated company which is a violation of the Clty contract~ This information just came to light; the contractor was only able to get the insurance as of Monday, April 30, which was not in time for noticing of this meeting~ In order for the Redevelopment Agency Minutes -12- May 3, contractor to continue, it is an urgent item; it is an item of public health and safety~ MOTION MSC (Cox/Moore) add the item regarding ratifying and accepting "B" rated liability insurance company on Third Avenue crosswalk replacement project to this agenda pursuant to government code section 54954~2 (b) (2) finding the need to take action arose subsequent to the agenda being posted~ (The vote was 4-0~ Member Malcolm was not present for the vote.) RESOLUTION 1077 RATIFYING AND ACCEPTING ~,B~, RATED LIABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY ON THIRD AVENUE CROSSWALK REPLACEMENT PROJECT RESOLUTION OFFERED BY CHAIPJ~AN COX~ the reading of the text was waived by unanimous consent~ passed and was approved~ (The vote was 4-0; Member Malcolm was not present for the vote.) 9~ DIRECTOR'S REPORT: None. 10. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT: Chairman Cox noted the Nature Interpretive Center's parking lot has been dispIaced as a result of the acceleration of the schedule for the construction of the off-ramps at I-5 and E Street~ MOTION MSC (Cox/Moore) refer the concern of the Agency regarding the lack of suitable parking at the Nature Interpretive Center to staff; direct staff to come back with a report by next Tuesday regarding what steps are being taken to provide temporary parking~ emergency parking~ add to implement the previously approved plan for a temporary parking lot under 'the SDG&E easement for the Nature Interpretive Center. (The vote was 4~0; Member Malcolm was not present for the vote.) 11~ MEMBERS~ COMMENTS: None~ ADJOURNMENT at 9:50 p~m. to the regular meeting of Thursday, May 17 1990 at 4:00 p.m~ ' Chris Salomone Community Development Director (Minutet3)