HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1997/11/25MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday, November 25, 1997
6:08 p.m.
1. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT:
ABSENT:
ALSO PRESENT:
CALL TO ORDER
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
Councilmembers: Moot, Padilia, Rindone, and Mayor Horton.
Councihnembers: Salas
Assistant City Manager, Sid W. Morris; City Anorney, John M. Kaheny; and
City Clerk, Beverly A. Authelet
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, MOMENT OF SILENCE
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 4, 1997 (regular city council meeting) and November 13, 1997
(special meeting/worksession).
Councilmember Rindone and Mayor Horton requested an abstention on the November 13, 1997 minutes since
neither wer~ at the meeting. Since there were only two members present who could vote on the November 13th
nfinutes, the minutes of November 13 were continued to the December 9th meeting.
MSC (Moot/Padilla) to appruve the minutes of November 4, 1997. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Salas absent).
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Randy Newhard, owner, New Way Professional Landscape Services, presented the Mayor and Council with
the Landscape Beautification Achievement Award in the category of Public Works Maintenance which they received
from The San Diego Chapter of the California Landscape Contractor's Association for Open Space District 20
(Rancho Del Rey Subdivision, SPA 3) Entry Monument area at the intersection of Telegraph Canyon Road and
Rancho Del Rey Boulevard.
b. A presentation was made hy Samuel J. "Sandy" Kahn, Managing Director, San Diego Air Commerce
Center, on the current redevelopment eftbrts at Brown Field.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(hem pulh'd: 7)
BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON, headings read, texts
waived, passed and appruved 4-0-1 (Salats absent).
5. VVRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter from the City Attorney stating that to the best of his knowledge from observance of actions
taken in Clused Session nn I 1/13/97 and 11/18/97 in which the City Attorney participated, that there were
no actions taken which are required under the Brown Act to be repnrted. The letter was received and filed.
Minutes
November 25, 1997
Page 2
b. Letter of r~signatinn from the Commission nn Aging - Marie Scrivener. The resignation was accepted
with regret, and the City Clerk was directed to post the vacancy immediately according to the Maddy Act in the
Clerk's Office and the Public Library.
6. ORDINANCE 2715 AMENDING SECTION 19.34.030 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW
DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANTS IN THE C-N NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE SUBJECT
TO APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (second readin~ and adoption) - The C-N Neighborhood
Commercial zone presently excludes drive-in including by interpretation drive-through restaurants. This proposal
is a request to amend the zoning ordinance to allow for drive-through restaurants upon the issuance of a conditional
use permit. The ordinance was placed on second reading and was adopted. (Acting Director of Planning)
7. RESOLUTION 18818 SETTING DECEMBER 9, 1997 AS THE DATE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
FOR CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED AGREEMENT TO GRANT A MODIFIED FRANCHISE
AGREEMENT TO COX COMMUNICATIONS (COXCOM) INC., DBA COX COMMUNICATIONS SAN
DIEGO - One of the economic development sub-goals outlined by Council in the past year's priority setting
workshops was the review of all City franchise agreements. This resolution would set the hearing date for a
proposed amendment to the City's franchise with Cox Communications. Among the terms of this proposal, the City
would be able to implement an additional phase of the SmartCommunity program as developed in a series of 1996
public workshops. Other recommendations include an increase in the franchise fee to the industry standard level
of 5% of gross revenues and extending the agreement li:>r an additional ten years. The resolution was pulled y
Councilmember Rindone fi~r discussion. (Principal Management Assistant Young)
Councilmember Rindone stated that according to the staff report, the City CounciI meetings would only continue
to be presented on Cox Cable fbr two more years. He asked what would occur alier this and how would the
broadcast of the City Council meetings be taken care of.
Gerald Young, Principal Management Assistant, stated that the current franchise agreement calls for Cox to provide
a government access channel. It does not specificaIly provide ti~r our meetings to be televised on that channel.
What this amendment would do would be to continue what Cox is now doing in the rebroadcasting of the video
tapes that we make of the Council meetings for the next two years. After that point, we would be provided with
the equipment and the hookup necessary for the City to put those video tapes into a playback rimchine that would
broadcast it directly onto the Cox government access channel. It is currently being broadcasted on the public access
channel. There would continue to be access by the public.
Councilmember Rindone had another questions regarding the adjustment of the franchise fee which was a different
form of taxation which would result in a 66% increase in the annual franchise payment. He felt thiswas excessive
and wanted to know how we would justify' this.
Mr. Young stated that a 5% franchise fee is actually the State and Federal maximum and is standard within the
industry. Mostoftheother franchise jurisdictions within San Diego Countyalsochargethatrate. By comparison,
Chula Vista has been charging below market rate tbr the use of the City's right-ot:way tbr the installation and
maintenance of cable facilities.
Councilmember Rindone stated that it still was a form of an assessment. He has a concern on this and has not fully
resolved his concerns.
RESOLUTION 18818 OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOOT, heading read, text waived, passed and
approved 4-0-1 (Salas absent).
Minutes
November 25~ 1997
Page 3
8. RESOLUTION 18819 APPROVING THE PRIORITIES, POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR
THE 1998/99 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM - The City has
participated in the Federal CDBG program since its inception in 1974. The program's primary objective is
development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment, principally
for persons of low and moderate income. Each year prior to the allocation of CDBG funds, there is a public
comment and review period. The priorities, policies, and procedures approved by Council fbr the 1997/98 CDBG
process proved successful and provided a lbundation tier determining funding recommendations. The resolution was
approved. (Director of Community Development)
9. RESOLUTION 18820 ACCEPTING A TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANT FROM THE
CALIFORNIA HEALTHY CITIES PROJECT/FOOD FOR ALL FISCAL YEAR 1997/98; APPROPRIATING
$25,000 TO THE GRANT FUND (290-2905) FROM UNANTICIPATED GRANT REVENUE FOR THE
EXPENDITURE AND REIMBURSEMENT OF SAID CITY FUNDING FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
CHULA VISTA GARDEN COLLABORATIVE PROJECT - On 8/5/97, the California Healthy Cities Project
announced a grant award from FOOD FOR ALL, a nonprofit public benefit corporation established to fight hunger
both nationally and internationally. Because Chula Vista is a designated California Healthy City, project staff
invited the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Department to apply for this grant funding. The resolution was
approve& (Director of Parks, Recreation and Open Space) 4/Sth's vote required.
10. RESOLUTION 18821 APPROVING A CONTRACT AMENDMENT WITH DWIGHT WORDEN
FOR LEGAL SERVICES CONCERNING THE METRO SEWER SYSTEM - On 2/25/97~ Council entered into
an agreement with Dwight Worden fi>r legal services in assisting City staff in negotiating the new or revised Metro
Sewer Agreement. The terms of the Agreement provided that costs be based on actual time spent per the fee
schedule. It also stated that costs would not be paid above $30,000 unless approved by Council. The costs paid
on this agreement are nearing $30,000 and there is still significant legal work required. The resolution was
approved. (Director ot' Public Works)
* * * END OF CONSENT GILENDAR * * *
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mrs. Claycomb, 540 Flower Strect. representing those in wheelchairs, wanted to know what could be done about
the places that claim to be wheelchair accessible, but are really not. An example was "E" Street and Broadway.
If you try to cross at the intersection, you have to maneuver through the bars so you are not only endangering your
life but other people who stop suddenly could also get hit.
Mayor Horton directed her to the Building and Housing staff,
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
11. PUBLIC HEARING ADOPTION OF THE POGGI CANYON BASIN GRAVITY SEWER
ANALYSIS AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE POGGI CANYON SEWER BASIN DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEE - The Poggi Canyon Basin Gravity Sewer Basin Plan was prepared by Wilson Engineering to
recommend sewer improvements necessary to convey sewage flows fi-om the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin to existing
or proposed downstream sewerage facilities. Based on the analysis, a Development Impact Fee of $400 per
Equivalent Dwelling Unit should be established to pay fbr these thcilities. Ordinance was placed on first reading
and the resolutions were approved. (Director of Public Works)
Minutes
November 25, 1997
Page 4
A. ORDINANCE 2716 ESTABLISHING THE POGGI CANYON SEWER BASIN DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEE TO PAY FOR SEWER IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE POGGI CANYON SEWER BASIN
AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS (first teadine)
B. RESOLUTION 18822 ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS 98-06 FOR THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE POGGI CANYON SEWER BASIN DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE
C. RESOLUTION 18823 APPROPRIATING $1,756,440 FROM FUND 222, THE TRUNK SEWER
CAPITAL RESERVE FUND, TO FINANCE A PORTION OF THE POGGI CANYON TRUNK SEWER
AND TRANSFERRING IT TO A NEW FUND FOR THE POGGI CANYON TRUNK SEWER DIF - 4/5th's
vote required.
D. RESOLUTION 18824 ADOPTING THE POGGI CANYON BASIN GRAVITY SEWER BASIN
PLAN
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated this item would establish the development impact fee for the main
sewer line serving the Poggi Canyon. A portion of it will be a new sewer serving a portion of EastLake, Otay
Ranch, and Sunbow. It will also parallel an older sewer which was not of an adequate size and take the flow to
the Otay Valley regional system. Staff recommends that a fee of $400 per EDU be created and also contribute from
the trunk capital reserve fund, which is Fund 222 in which $2200 is collected from every EDU in the eastern area,
about $1.7 million to pay tbr the paralleling of the system downstream. They have met with the developers and
other people t~om the area.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Councilmember Rindone asked if the entire city was paying tier sewer funds to supplant some of the costs t~,r the
EDUs in a specific region.
Mr. Lippitt state/d that was correct. That has also been done in other districts such as Salt Creek and has been done
to upsize sewer lines where there wasn't a DIF but it was impacted by development. One of the eligible expenses
that we can pay tbr out of that fund is tbr upsizing sewer lines fbr capacity in the City. [t is a city-wide fee which
comes from the connection charge when new development connects to the sewer hnt it is only for new development
not fbr existing repairs.
Mayor Horton asked why the Resource Conservation Commission was so split on this issue.
Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator, stated that three of the RCC members had concerns involved in
what they thought was a premature project, and they wanted it divided into different phases. They fi~lt it was
premature because it covered such a large undeveloped area.
Mayor Horton stated that the two members who voted to support staft's recommendation were the two individuals
on that commission who actually have technical backgrounds in engineering.
Councilmember Moot f~lt it was unusual that the RCC's action voting against putting sewer projects in was unusual.
It would be very helpful to have the minutes when you have a divided commission, especially when they are voting
against the staff reconunendation. He would like to know why that has occurred. In the County, sewers are often
controversial, but it is controversial because the denial of sewers and connecting to sewers is ollen perceived as a
method to stop development. He wondered to what extent that may have been an issue. When we have the
minutes, sometimes those issues become evident.
Mr. Reid replied that the RCC minutes are Action Minutes only. A motion is made and the vote identified. There
is no explanation of the discussion which takes place. There was no linkage between non-development stance and
not approving the sewers. It was simply a matter of timing.
Minutes
November 25, 1997
Page 5
Councilmember Padilia concurred that it was very help fill when you have the commission minutes in order to get
an idea of what the thinking was on the item. Looking at the formula that was arrived at to get the DIF per EDU
as new permits are issued was calculated on an estimate of the total number of EDUs that have already been through
the approval process, and we don't anticipate a great fluxuation in that even if future amendments occur. He
assumed there was a provision that if there was a dramatic change in the pr~jection that would alter the equitibility
of the tbrmula, that Council would have the ability of look at that in the future if the number changes significantly.
Mr. Lippitt responded that in fact in any type of DIF, we should look at it every five years. But in this one, we
are planning on looking at it in a couple of years, because we do think that there may be some changes, so we
would adjust it.
Councilmember Padilia wanted to make sure this was out there, and it was fairly consistent and if it remained titirly
consistent then whether you do it phased or do it in a large portion, he did not see a direct cost impact. There is
an impact on changing what the potential equity in the distribution would be or in the cost. Given that is the case,
then he had no problem in supporting this.
Councilmember Rindone felt that contrary to what has been presented, the idea of phasing is counter productive
because it does spread it out ultimately to all of the housing developments that would be beneficial. He limit that
stafi's recommendation was on target.
There being no one indicating a desire to address the Council, the public hearing was closed.
ORDINANCE 2716 WAS PLACED ON FIRST READING AND RESOLUTIONS 18822, 18823, AND 18824
WERE OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON, titles read, texts waived, passed and approved 4-0-1 (Salas
absent).
12. PUBLIC HEARING ON ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 93-01 FOR ALLEY
IMPROVEMENTS EAST OF SECOND AVENUE AND SOUTH OF "J" STREET - Council accepted a petition
signed by a majority of the property owners adjacent to the alley east of Second Avenue between "J" and Kearney
Streets to form a special assessment district tier the constructiun of improvements to the alley. Council subsequently
awarded the contract to Fox Construction Company which completed the alley improvement project on 10/30/95.
(Director of Public Works)
MSC (Hurtnn/Padilla) to cuntinue the item to December 9, 1997. Approved 4-0-1 (Salas absent).
13. PUBLIC HEARING REVIEWING AND CONSIDERING PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE DRAFT
AMENDMENT TO THE FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT
(CDBG) CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL PLAN TO INCLUDE THE PROPOSED HUD SECTION 108 SMALL
BUSINESS REVOLVING LOAN FUND ACTIVITY- Council previously approved the use of CDBG funds to
hire a consultant to assist staff to develop a HUD Section 108 Loan/Loan Guarantee Program, and approved a
contract with Claggett Wolfe Associates. On 8/5/97, Council approved the consultant's Phase I ti~asibility findings
and directed staff and the consultant to proceed with preparing a Section 108 application and developing a Small
Business Revolving Loan Program. Prior to submitting the Section 108 application, the proposed Section 108
activity must be included in the City's adopted CDBG Consolidated Annual Plan. The proposed amendment to the
fiscal year 1997/98 Plan adds the proposed Section 108 Revolving Loan Fund activity. This is the first of two
public hearings. The second public hearing is scheduled ti>r December 16, 1997. Council conducted the public
hearing and accept public comment. (Director of Community Development)
This being the fune and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. There being no one indicating a desire
to address the Council, the public hearing was closed.
MSC (Horton/Moot) to set the second public hearing fi~r December 16, 1997. Approved 4-0-1 (Salas absent).
Minutes
November 25, 1997
Page 6
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
14. RESOLUTION 18825 WAIVING THE BIDDING PROCESS, ACCEPTING BIDS, AND
AWARDING CONTRACT FOR "GRADING RESTORATION AND SILT REMOVAL FOR BONITA LONG
CANYON DETENTION BASIN IN THE CITY (DRI29)" AND APPROPRIATING $20,000 FROM THE
UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE OF THE STORM DRAIN REVENUE FUND - The City maintains a dam built
by McMillin in the Bonita Long Canyon as part of their Bonita Long Canyon Estates project. The dam was
designed as a detention basin to protect properties located downstream from flooding. It also serves as a siltation
basin and needs to be cleaned periodically. Council was sent a memo dated 10/31/97 wherein staff requested
authorization to tbllow the inti~rmal bid process instead of the normal bid process. By tbllowing the informal bid
process the prqiect will be under construction 56 working days ahead of schedule. The resolution awarding the
contract to Roberts Engineering Contractors was approved. (Director of Public Works) 4/Sth's vote required.
Councilmember Rindone stated that this was 48 percent over the Engineer's estimate. He couldn't remember a bid
coming in with a recommendation that was so fhr above the Engineer's estimate. He was under the understanding
that the job was more extensive than originally anticipated. He asked if staff l~lt comti>rtable with that.
Mr. Lippitt responded that it may be somewhat more extensive, but he t~lt it was the difficulty in what was
underneath -- the suitability of the soil and to get equipment in there. This is not a type of prqject where there is
a normal grading operation or a normal bidding process, so when you sit down and estimate something like this,
it is very difficult.
Councilmember Rindone stated he would support this, hut he hoped that we would put something in a tickler file
so that we could be proactive and not have to do it after the fact in an emergency situation. Particularly, since this
situation was so much higher. With the potential of an El Nino, we want to insure that we are not going to have
clogged drains which would cause other problems.
Councilmember Moot stated he understood there were some delays in getting this going because of a need to obtain
a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers under the Clean Water Act. What was the relationship between the
silting basin and the Clean Water Act.
Mr. Lippitt replied that the Army Corps of Engineers is basically responsible and has expanded their authority over
more and more drainage projects every time thereds any habitat. That is a problem with this retention basion --
habitat grows up, so we have to get a permit in order to remove it. We have been working on this for several
months. We could not go out to bid until we had approval.
RESOLUTION 18825 OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER RINDONE, heading read, text waived, passed
and approved 4-0-1 (Salas absent).
15. REPORT REQUEST FOR A TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF BROADWAY
AND FLOWER STREET - In September 1997, staff received a written request with a petition to consider
installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Broadway and Flower Street. The request cited the need for a
traftic signal because of the accidents and many near misses at the intersection of Broadway and Flower Street.
The Council accepted the report and recommended the assignment of an adult crossing guard and have staff
negotiate with the Chula Vista Elementary School District to share the cost on a 50-50 basis. The resolution was
approved. (Director of Public Works)
Minutes
November 25, 1997
Page 7
A. RESOLUTION 18826 AUTHORIZING THE ASSIGNMENT OF AN ADULT CROSSING GUARD
AT THE INTERSECTION OF BROADWAY AND FLOWER TO BE JOINTLY FUNDED BY EDISON
FEASTER SCHOOL AND THE CITY AND APPROPRIATING $3,000 FROM THE UNAPPROPRIATED
BALANCE OF THE GENERAL FUND TO PAY THE C1TY'S SHARE - 4/Sth's vote required.
B. RESOLUTION 18827 AUTHORIZING THE TRANSFER OF $30,000 FROM THE EXISTING
BALANCE OF PROJECT NUMBER TF220 - TRAFFIC SIGNAL/l-805 AT OTAY VALLEY ROAD FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FLASHING BEACON AT THE INTERSECTION OF BROADWAY AND
FLOWER STREET
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated that traffic engineering staff has been doing their annual evaluation
of signals around the City to evaluate their position on the traffic signal priority list. This intersection may move
up a lot further than mentioned in the staff report. His feeling was that this needed to be evaluated before we make
a recommendation to spend $30,000 on the flashing light. The other problem is that both the traffic engineer and
the city engineer were on vacation this week, so he has not had time to talk with them. He would like to proceed
in authorizing the crossing guard nnw, but hold off fur two weeks on the decision about the flashing light. It may
be a position that if it is high enough on the traffic signal priority list and we have enough money to do it, then we
may recommend doing that and use the $30,000 towards the design. He would like to come back with the final
recommendations on the second part in twn weeks.
Addressing Council was:
· Greg Campbell, 531 Flower Street, Chula Vista, 91910, stated that since the school has taken over that
lot and closed off the streek there is a lot more traffic. It is very dark at night on that comer. He suggested
installing a traffic light. He didn't l~el that a flashing light would be sufficient. He also stated that he did not feel
that the City should have to pay 50 percent. The school district did buy that lot and it is used by the school district.
He felt the responsibility should fall on them 100 percent.
RESOLUTION 18826 OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON, heading read, text waived, passed and appn~ved
4-0-1 (Salas obsent).
MSC (Hnrton/Padilla) tn continue Re~nlution 18827 tier two weeks. Mntinn carried 4-0-1 (Salas absent).
Councilmember Rindone requested when this item comes back that staff give Council an analysis of the traffic
studies that were done when the requests lbr the closure of the street was made, because he felt there could be a
lesson we could learn from this. There will be other requests/i,r street closures, and the potential is that the impact
was greater than would be mitigated.
ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
(Item 7 was pulled, however the minutes will reflect the printed agenda order).
OTHER BUSINESS
16. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S)
Mr. Morris, Assistant City Manager, reminded Council that:
® On December 2, a special meeting had been scheduled with the City Manger to discuss city manager
applicants.
· On December 9 there was a 4:00 p.~n. special workshop set to discuss the Otay Valley region.
Minutes
November 25, 1997
Page 8
Mayor Horton felt this was not reasonable. There are three members of the Council ~vho want to change that date.
She felt that it would have go into January.
· SDG&E's Executive Board has taken action to sell off their energy generation business. This will have
an impact on Chula Vista.
17. MAYOR'S REPORT(S) - none.
18. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Rindone - stated he knew that next Tuesday, Council will be beginning the process collectively to
review the applicants tbr city manager. It was his understanding that the current city manager would not be
involved in that process. We were talking about a consultant fbr that time. This is where we need to make the
change. He was concerned that any person would be involved in the selection of his or her successor.
Mayor Horton stated that was not her recollection. She ti>und it beneficial to listen to him; we are only taking
information. It is up to us to make up our mind as to whom we want to select as finalists.
Mr. Morris reported that it was his understanding that what Council will be receiving on December 2, is a fbrmal
report from the city manager as to what he has provided to Council in writing to date discussing the backgrounds
and the infi~rmation he has collected. This will be his attempt in bringing this to a closure and providing Council
with a significant amount of detail on the various candidates. Notwithstanding, the Council nmy want a consultant
there. The consultant may have certain information, but also the city manager is going to have his own set of
infbrmation that could be valuable to the City Council. His reconm~endation was that the City Council consider
a follow-up meeting where the City Manager is involved in this process, and he can provide that information to
Council.
Councilmember Rindone summarized that on December 2nd there will be a review, but there will not be any
whittling down of the applicants. On December 9th, we will be selecting the final candidates to do the assessment
center. He felt that the input and the value that Mr. Goss has played to this point has been extremely important,
but he also felt that if this was the intent of the Council to begin the whittling down of the process on December
2nd, then he felt it was equally important that the consultant that we have hired participate in that meeting, and we
get his input as well. What he was ohiecting to was getting exclusively the input of the current City Manager and
not utilizing the consultant on December 2nd. Theretbre, he referred this to staff to consider utilizing the consultant
that Council has authorized for this process on December 2nd as well.
Councilmember Moot - stated there was an article in the newspaper about the City of San Diego potentially pulling
their animal control contract with the Council under the belief that the costs have gotten too expensive, and the
services provided to them were not adequate. It was an interesting/hotnote because our staff came to the conclusion
that if we conunitted to the County, we might be in the position where we would have no control over what the rates
would be in Chula Vista. It was interesting that our staff made a correct prediction on that one.
The meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
Respectlhlly submitted,
~uthelet, CMC/AAE
City Clerk