Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1997/06/03 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, June 3, 1997 Council Chambers 4:04 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers: Moot (arrived at 4:11 p.m.), Padilia (arrived at 4:55 p.m.), Rindone and Mayor Hotton. ABSENT: Councilmembers: None ALSO PRESENT: City Manager, John D. Goss; City Attorney, John M. Kaheny; and City Clerk, Beverly A. Authelet 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG. MOMENT OF SILENCE 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None submitted. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS .OF THE DAY: a. Proclaiming the week of June 1 through June 7, 1997 as "Management Week." The proclamation was presented by Mayor Horton to Kathy Baker, President of the Rohr Chula Vista Chapter of the National Management Association. b. Presentation of Key to the City. Mayor Horton presented a key to the City to Miss Chula Vista, Jana Sutter, who won the crown for the "Fairest of the Fair" for San Diego County at the Del Mar Fair, who will go on to compete for Miss California. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items Pulled: None) (Item Added: Item 13a) CONSENT CALENDAR OFFERED BY COUNCILMEMBER RINDONE, reading of texts waived, titles read, passed and approved 4-0-1 (Padilia absent). 5. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter from the City Attorney stating that to the best of his knowledge from observance of actions taken in Closed Session on 5/27/97 in which the City Attorney participated, that there were no reportable actions which are required under the Brown Act to be reported. It is recommended that the letter be received and filed. 6. RESOLUTION 18684 AMENDING THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA EMERGENCY PLAN - Chapter 2.14 (Emergency Organization Department) of the Municipal Code provides for: the preparation and carrying out of plans for the protection of persons and property within the City in the event of an emergency; the direction of the emergency organization; and the coordination of the emergency functions of this City with all other public agencies, corporations, organizations, and affected private persons. The Chula Vista Emergency Plan, originally adopted in June of 1992, has been amended in conjunction with the San Diego County Office of Disaster Minutes June 3, 1997 Page 2 ..,~.. Preparedness. The Plan continues as the basis for conducting emergency operations in the greater Chula Vista area, and incorporates the Standardized Emergency Management System concepts designed to be used in any type of emergency situation. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Fire Chief) 7.A. RESOLUTION 18679 MAKING FINDINGS ON THE PETITION FOR THE OTAY RANCH VILLAGE ONE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 97-2 - Village Development has formally petitioned the City to use assessment district financing for certain public improvement to be located in Village One of the Otay Ranch. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) Continued from the meeting of 5/27/97. B. RESOLUTION 18680 MAKING APPOINTMENTS IN THE OTAY RANCH VILLAGE ONE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 97-2 AND APPROVING THE FORM OF THE ACQUISITION/FINANCING AGREEMENT THEREFOR C. RESOLUTION 18681 ADOPTING A MAP SHOWING THE PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF THE OTAY RANCH VILLAGE ONE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 97-2 D. RESOLUTION 18682 DECLARING INTENTION TO ORDER THE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS IN A PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT; DECLARING THE WORK TO BE DONE TO BE OF MORE THAN LOCAL OR ORDINARY BENEFIT; DESCRIBING THE DISTRICT TO BE ASSESSED TO PAY THE COST AND EXPENSES THEREOF; AND PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS FOR THE OTAY RANCH VILLAGE ONE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBER 97-2 ~" Item continued to June 10, 1997. 8. REPORT APPLICATION OF THE CHULA VISTA LITERACY TEAM FOR CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY - CALIFORNIA LIBRARY SERVICES ACT FAMILIES FOR LITERACY GRANT FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 - The Public Library has applied to the California State Library for $23,000 in Families for Literacy funding for fiscal year 1997/98 to continue special family literacy services and programming. The Chula Vista Literacy Team has offered family literacy programming for the past six years. The Family Reading Program was developed to break the inter-generational cycle of illiteracy by providing training for volunteer tutors whose learners are parents of young children, special library programming for those learners and their families, and a home collection of quality children's books and magazines for each participating family. Staff recommends Council accept the report and ratify the application. (Library Director) ITEM ADDED TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR: 13a. RESOLUTION 18689 OPPOSING LIFTING THE ISTEA TRUCK SIZE AND WEIGHT RESTRICTIONS AND MAINTAINING CURRENT ISTEA TRUCK LIMITATIONS WITHOUT A STATE OPTION PROVISION. Resolution brought forward by Councilmember Salas under her comments. At her request, it was moved to the Consent Calendar. The Resolution opposes lifting of the ban on triple trailer vehicles. Councilmember Salas stated some community groups brought this to her attention. Under the ISTEA regulations, triple trailers have been prohibited from traveling California highways. Those regulations are due to expire. In order to make sure that the restriction stays in place, several community groups and cities have also passed --~ resolutions to request that the restrictions stay in place. Triple trailers have been shown to be very dangerous and ( have been the cause of numerous traffic fatalities. Also, because of the weight of the triple trailers, they cause a lot of damage to the roads and freeways. * * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * * Minutes June 3, 1997 Page 3 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS ® Emerald Randolf, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, Director of the C.A.S.T. program, announced that on June 25, they will be having a CAST Chula Vista Day at the new White Canyon Water Park. She stated that special coupons worth $5.00 were available. It was their major fund raiser for the year; they will get a percentage of what the Water Park will get for the day. ® Mary Quartiano, 4080 Hancock Street, No 43 11, San Diego, 92110, representing the Revolting Grandmas, requested that the City Council pass a resolution in support of deploying the California National Guard troops along the border regions of San Diego County and send it to Governor Wilson. · Muriel Watson, 3120 Anderson Street, Bonita, 91902, Founder of Light Up the Border, stated that there are a number of families of Border Patrol Agents who are now under great jeopardy as a result of intelligence passed forward that Border Patrol Agents are now prime targets for the drug smugglers. She urged Council to come up with a resolution that will match those by other cities. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 9.A. PUBLIC HEARING PCM 97-20: CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE OTAY RANCH SPA ONE PLAN ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON 1,110 ACRES SOUTH OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD BETWEEN PASEO RANCHERO AND THE FUTURE SR-125 ALIGNMENT - McMillin has submitted an amendment and tentative map for the portion of SPA One owned by WCLF to subdivide 290 acres creating 1,877 residential units in Villages One and Five. The SPA Amendment proposes deleting Pedestrian Park P-5 and Santa Delphina Avenue as a promendate street in Neighborhood R-11 of Village One. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Planning) RESOLUTION 18685 ADOPTING THE THIRD ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL SECOND-TIER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (FEIR 95-01) FOR THE OTAY RANCH SECTION PLANNING AREA (SPA) ONE PLAN AND APPROVING AN AMENDMENT PCM 97-20 TO THE OTAY RANCH SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) ONE PLAN, IMPOSING CONDITIONS ON WHICH INCLUDES THE OVERALL DESIGN PLAN, VILLAGE DESIGN PLAN, PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS, PARKS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS PLAN, REGIONAL FACILITIES REPORT, PHASE 2 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PLAN AND SUPPORTING PLANS, NON-RENEWABLE ENERGY CONSERVATION PLAN, RANCH-WIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN, SPA ONE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PLAN AND THE GEOTECHNICAL RECONNAISSANCE REPORT B. PUBLIC HEARING PCS 97-02: CONSIDERATION OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR 290 ACRES OF THE OTAY RANCH SPA ONE, TRACT 97-02, GENERALLY LOCATED OFF THE SOUTHERN EXTENSION OF OTAY LAKES ROAD SOUTH OF TELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD RESOLUTION 18686 ADOPTING THE THIRD ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FEIR 95-01 (SCH//95021012) AND APPROVING A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PORTIONS OF THE OTAY RANCH SPA ONE, TRACT 97-02, AND MAKING NECESSARY FINDINGS Councilmember Moot stated he needed to excuse himself because this involved McMillin, and they were clients of his company. Rick Rosaler, Senior Planner, presented the staff report and stated that the application by McMillin has been reviewed by staff and the Planning Commission and is recommended for approval. The application has been found consistent with the SPA Plan except fbr the two amendments which are proposed. The tentative map proposes 527 Minutes June 3, 1997 Page 4 single family residential lots, 1350 multi family units in the Village 5 core with a 10 acre elementary school, 15 acres for parks, 3.3 acres of commercial land uses, and 8 acres for Community Purpose Facilities. Councilmember Rindone stated that if SDG&E was proposing to put their utility box under the sidewalk and it would necessitate an easement behind that for access, why would it not be proposed to be at the other end of the sidewalk so that the easement would be the parkway. Cliff Swanson, City Engineer, stated that the existing condition, the way the utilities are put in the trenches right now, you will see on the outer edge under the monolithic sidewalk, is the utility trench. That is where the electrical and cable TV go. Then they have the transformer pedestals behind the sidewalk but still within the street right-of- way. In normal situations, they also have a street tree easement there. On this particular project, the utilities will still be in the trench under the sidewalk. SDG&E is concerned about putting the transformer box within the parkway because of the proximity to the traffic and the damage that would be done if a car were to hit it. That is why SDG&E wants a specific easement behind it. The transformers would be put in place with walls around it, so that the property owners would recognize it, and it could share that common trench with the other utilities and the easement for the street trees. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Addressing Council were: · Pat Barnes, representing SDG&E, stated that in some situations they have undergrounded in the back. For access, they prefer it to be out in the franchised position in the City right-of-way. That way they do not have to go through peoples' yards to service the utilities. In this particular sidewalk configuration, the problem that SDG&E is having with it is that it is pushing them out of their franchise position onto private property requiring them to get an easement from the property owners, which in some cases, when it comes to servicing and maintaining their package, which is under the sidewalk, they go into the ground (they do not tear up the sidewalk) behind it and go underneath. That is when they would be digging into a private property owner's yard. City Council considered the following issues: · Pedestrian Park P-5: should it be deleted from Neighborhood R-I 1 in the SPA One Plan? Mr. Rosaler stated that the issues involved in the project focus on the elimination of Pedestrian Park P-5. Concerns by McMillin are that they felt in Neighborhood R-11 that the lot sizes were sufficient to provide for the private recreational needs of the neighborhood. In addition, there were neighborhood parks in P-1 and P-2 in this neighborhood to satisfy the Park Plan requirements of the SPA. Park P-5 is a .8 acre park. McMillin's proposal was to eliminate the park but maintain the pedestrian connection through to the regional trail access. In Village Development's proposal, they included the small pedestrian parks to meet the private recreational needs of the neighborhood. If the Council agrees with the applicant, then Council should adopt the amendment. If Council wants to see the Pedestrian Park in the neighborhood, then Council should deny the amendment and direct that a Pedestrian Park be included in the tentative map. Councilmember Salas asked the following questions: (1) What was the relationship between Park P-5 and P-6.3. (2) If we wanted to retain Park P-5, would it be a public park and would it be maintained by a homeowners association or would it be maintained by an open space district. (3) Were there any physical barriers or restrictions between Village Development and West Coast Land Fund properties which would impede the ability of people being able to utilize the parks. (4) What percentage of credit would you be assigning West Coast Land Fund or whomever the next property owner would be if we voted to retain Park P-5. Mr. Rosaler responded that P-6.3 was in Village 5. Neighborhood R-11 is in Village 1. McMillin is going to put in their portion of P-6.3 and the Paseo which comes down to the village core. In Village 5, there is a 10 acre park (P-6); there is a 1.7 acre park (P-8) which is the Town Square Park; and there is a 5 acre park (P-7). These are the public parks. Park P-5 would be a public park that would be maintained by an Open Space Maintenance District. Since there are private streets in Village Development's portion of the project and there are public streets in Neighborhood R-11, there is no street access going through. However, there is an emergency access that is also Minutes June 3, 1997 Page 5 required to be a pedestrian access between R-10 and R-11. With the Pedestrian Parks, there would be some restriction since they are private parks and would be owned and maintained by the residents of those neighborhoods. As far as park credits, we do not know at this time because the small park criteria hasn't been developed. If they came in with a proposal similar to Village Development's, staff would probably be recommending 50% because it has all of the facilities which are required by the SPA I Parks Plan. The development of that criteria is on the work agenda for the Parks and Recreation Department in the coming year. ® Hollywood Driveways: should the required number of Hollywood driveways be reduced? Mr. Rosaler stated that a Hollywood Driveway in the SPA Plan is a plan that requires an "L" shaped home with the garage pushed to the back of the unit. In some cases, there is a landscaped strip in the middle of the drive or it can be other decorative material. McMillin was concerned about the marketability of these types of units and proposed alternative language to what is in the existing SPA. Staff is concerned and has addressed the marketability issue by indicating that the Planning Director, if they can provide evidence that those types of units are not marketable, has the ability to waive the requirement and replace it with another design that is consistent with the village design plan. ® Parkways: should residential streets with parkways be used in the applicant's residential neighborhoods? Mr. Rosaler stated that a Residential Street Section A is a street with parkways. McMillin has indicated to staff that the Residential Street Section A is acceptable to them as long as the individual homeowner maintains the parkway, and there is not a master homeowners association. · Parkway Streets: should a master homeowners association be required to maintain the open space and landscaping? Mr. Rosaler stated that the Engineering Department believed that all the parkways, major slopes, and the additional landscaping that is in the SPA Plan should be maintained by the homeowners. The conditions of approval have been prepared to provide flexibility to allow Council to provide staff direction. Whatever direction is provided when the Open Space Maintenance District is formed, staff will ensure that those t~tcilities are included either in a Homeowners Association or in the Open Space Maintenance District. Councilmember Rindone asked why would Council want to include the pedestrian parkway in with the Homeowners Association or the Commununity Facilities District. Why not leave it to be the responsibility of the homeowner. Mr. Rosaler stated that would be acceptable to staff. The Planning Commission was concerned about common maintenance of it; that there be uniform maintenance of the parkways throughout the neighborhood. If there was common maintenance that would insure a better quality of pedestrian environment. Mayor Horton expressed that she had a concern with this and that the Planning Commission's recommendation was most prudent. Not all homeowners treat their lawns equal. The purpose of having these promenades is to create a nicer ambience for the cormnunity. The only way we will have an assurance in doing that is to include it in the common maintenance. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Addressing Council were: ® Craig Fukuyama, 2727 Hover Avenue, National City, representing McMillin Companies. He stated that there was an article in the paper which questioned their intent and commitment to the Plan. He wanted to present for the record a list of the documents that govern the design of the Project and that they were in compliance of each and everyone. They do have four issues which are very minor in nature, and the integrity of the Plan is still in place; they are consistent with the General Plan, the GDP, and the overall Design Plan. He wanted to assure Council that they were committed to these Plans. He addressed the tbur issues: Minutes June 3, 1997 Page 6 ~-~, Pedestrian Park P-5: He stated that they supported staffs recommendation as well as that of the Parks and Recreation Commission which is recommending the elimination of this park. The total number of units will not increase with the elimination of the park. One of the reasons for the elimination of the park was really driven by the maintenance issue. Staff is recommending that there be an Open space Maintenance District formed for the maintenance of the park. Utilizing an OSMD for the maintenance creates a dilemma which staff has not fully addressed. If only this neighborhood were to be assessed for the maintenance for this park, there would be a f~eling of exclusivity and the desire to preclude anyone else from accessing that park if they had the maintenance responsibilities. If an OSMD were used that would be collected from the entire development, there would be a disagreement as to the access, the ability to walk to, and would create a problem in the collection of the fee on the entire project. It creates an inequity that may create a problem in the future. They believed that if the park was determined to be an essential part of the Plan and is to be accessible to all residents, it should be a public park. It should be owned by the public and funded by the public. Hollywood Driveways: The Hollywood driveway concept would apply only to the one neighborhood, R- 11. The Hollywood driveways have not been recently used in the marketplace, and they were reluctant to accept an absolute requirement for 30%. Their preference was to let the market dictate the final percentages. Rather than a prescriptive minimum of 30 %, they would initially construct one model home which would be one of four, which would be 25 % using the 30 tbot setback and the Hollywood driveway concept and then determine the marketplace preferences. If the house was already built, then there would not be a removal of that house, so they would not be able to abandon that type of product; it would still be there, but would be plotted at a lesser percentage. They would prefer to adapt quickly by marketplace demands as opposed to being burdened with a cumbersome and lengthy process of coming back to the City "~' to adjust to the market preferences. Parkway Streets: It was their intent to respect the wishes of staff and construct the parkway as type A Streets throughout the project. However, it was their preference not to have a Homeowners Association or an Open Space Maintenance District funding the maintenance of those parkways. It would be their preference to utilize CC&Rs which the City has the ability but not the obligation to enforce that would provide instructions for every homeowner as to the maintenance obligations and responsibilities. Master Homeowners Association: They preferred to form the continued use of the OSMD. Their experience indicates that some home buyers prefer not to have an HOA. They have no private facilities which necessitate the formation of an HOA. Mayor Horton asked if the model that McMillin would be building with the Hollywood driveways was more expensive than the others being proposed. Mr. Fukuyama responded that they did not know yet. It was too new to know. They have constructed a comparable type product in one of their other projects. They believe it will be acceptable and preferable. They don't want to be tied to that in this market place not knowing what the market preferences will be. Councilmember Rindone asked for a clarification of the comment that he was willing to build Type A Streets throughout. But Type A Streets are only in two of the neighborhoods. Was that what he meant? Mr. Fukuyama responded that they have reconsidered their position, and they are committing to doing all Type A Streets. Mayor Horton closed the public hearing. Mayor Horton stated that we have several planned communities in the Eastern parts of Chula Vista. It was her understanding that the developers in those cases have pretty much had the opportunity to select which way they would rather go -- an assessment district or HOA. Minutes June 3, 1997 Page 7 Mr. Rosaler stated that in the past, McMillin in Rancho del Rey has proposed OSMD; EastLake has proposed HOA. Village Development's portion of Village One and Five was proposed to be maintained by OSMD, but when they went to the guarded entrances, then everything became private so they had to have the HOA. So, there has been a mix. Assistant City Attorney, Anne Moore, stated that what they negotiated with Sunbow is that they have the option of deciding whether or not they want to form a CFD or an HOA. The developer has indicated that they want to form a CFD. They are proposing the same thing with Salt Creek which is giving them an option of doing a CFD or an HOA. It was her understanding that Salt Creek preferred an HOA. The way they have structured the agreement with Sunbow and Salt Creek is that they have the option of deciding one or the other. If they decide they want to do a CFD that would be subject to Council's approval. If Council decides that they don't want to do a CFD then they would have to form an HOA. Since that is a future legislative action, staff cannot guarantee that a CFD would be approved by the Council. Mayor Horton stated that it would be her recommendation in this situation that McMillin should have the option of going forward with their preference. She had a concern about the maintenance of the parkways. It is easy to say that all the homeowners will make sure this is a well maintained area through the CC&Rs, but that is cumbersome. Personally, she agreed with the Planning Cormnission to have this included in a type of assessment district. She also t~lt the concerns of SDG&E should be addressed. Councilmember Rindone stated he had major concerns about the elimination of Pedestrian Park P-5. He would like to see this retained because the concept that Council has labored over was to maintain the Village concept with access to public parks. He was supportive of everything except the elimination of the park. Councilmember Salas stated that this has been a point of disagreement between staff and the developer of Village One, but she felt that when Village One was proposing these small residential parks, it was because their idea of what would be neo-traditional and staff felt that it would take away from that. She felt that this does retain the sense of community more than the elimination of the park would do. She was willing to give the applicant their request and not put an imposition on them on making a 30 % requirement on the Hollywood driveways in return for the retention of Park P-5. Motion on Hollywood Driveways: MSC (Horton/Padiila) to adopt for first reading an amendment to the PC District Regulations in regards to Hollywood Driveways in the language set forth in the staff's report that mirrors McMi!!in's proposal. Motion approved 4-0-0-1 (Moot abstaining). Motion on Parkway Maintenance: MSC (Padilla/Horton) to provide direction on the issue of maintenance for parkways through a Community Facility District consistent with the recommendation of the Planning Commission. Motion approved 4-0-0-1 (Moot abstaining). Motion on Pedestrian Park P-5: MSC (Padi!!a/Horton) to retain Pedestrian Park P-5 and leave the maintenance up to the developer to decide how they wanted to maintain the park either with an HOA or a CFD. Motion approved 4-0-0-1 (Moot abstaining). RESOLUTIONS 18685, 18686, AND ORDINANCE 2709 OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON AS AMENDED, titles read, texts waived. Councilmember Rindone stated he had concerns with the zero lot line product. He thought that this was not finalized and would have a chance for another review. Since this was a new product, he wanted to be assured that Minutes June 3, 1997 Page 8 the increased density would not dissipate the benefits of the community; he would like to request that this come back to Council for review at a later time. He asked if the maker of the motion would include this as a friendly amendment for the R-22 neighborhood, zero lot line issue. Mayor Horton stated she did not see a need for it, but she would support the request. She stated that we did have zero lot line products which have been approved in Rancho del Rey and in EastLake. Mr. Fukuyama stated that this particular product is being built in Rancho del Rey currently and is being marketed as Pasatiempo which is being built by UDC Homes. It was approved when the map was before Council. What staff is recommending is that with the plotting and some of the individual on-street parking aspects that staff expects without a product currently designed tbr it, the placement of the product will necessitate those lots to fluctuate in size, thereby likely reducing the number of the lots and the setbacks. That is typically done through the City's design review process and the final map before it comes back to Council for approval. Councilmember Rindone stated he was comtbrtable with this as long as Council gets a chance to look at this for the final approval. VOTE ON MOTION: Passed and approved 4-0-0-1 (Moot abstaining). BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS None submitted. ACTION ITEMS 10. REPORT PROPOSITION 218 IMPACTS ON OPEN SPACE DISTRICT FORMATION - At the 11/5/96 general election, Proposition 218 the "Right To Vote on Taxes Act," was passed by a majority of voters. This proposition impacts the formation of Open Space Districts by the "1972 Landscaping & Lighting Act." This report discusses the impacts and alternatives available to the City based on a study conducted by Berryman & Henigar, a consultant with expertise in this area. Staff recommends Council accept the report and adopt the policy. (Director of Public Works) Cliff Swanson stated that the new developments have in the past used OSMD to maintain the open space. Previously it was done under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. With the passage of Proposition 218, it presented problems to the continued use of that Act. The two significant issues with the 1972 Act and Proposition 218 are the questions of special benefit and that the City would have to pay lbr any general benefit. Secondly that the assessments would have to be levied on publicly owned property. This report recommends that no more OSMD be formed under the 1972 Act. Instead, the report recommends that the Council express a preference for HOA to maintain the open space district, but that the City maintain through an open space type district the medians. Recognizing that some developers do not want an HOA, staff recommends that we work with the developers to use a CFD based open space district for the open space. Lastly, staff recommends that CFDs are formed for maintenance of the medians. MSUC (Horton/Moot) to approve staff's recommendation to accept the report and adopt the policy. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (No items were pulled) OTHER BUSINESS 11. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) a. The next budget workshop was scheduled for Wednesday, June 4, 1997. Minutes June 3, 1997 Page 9 b. As an informational item, Mr. Goss stated that he had an opportunity to talk with the current Administrator of the local Scripps Hospital. He stated that they were proceeding with their proposals under the revisions of the project at Scripps in Chula Vista as approved by the Redevelopment Agency on January 7. They have had a successful fund raising drive of over $2 million. They feel that the letter in the newspaper was filed by certain doctors who were not totally happy with what Scripps was doing, but there are other physicians who are very supportive. They will be moving ahead with the Emergency Room, ICU, and the Cancer Center. They feel that by October they will have State approval tbr these projects. Councilmember Rindone asked that, in addition to a report, we find a way to disseminate this information so that there is an official public response. Mr. Goss stated that perhaps the other physicians in the Scripps family may be responding which may be more appropriate than the City responding. 12. MAYOR'S REPORT(S) Mayor Horton thanked the Downtown Business Association and staff members who worked very hard to put together the Lemon Festival. It was one of the more successful events that we have had. 13. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Rindone: He also congratulated the DBA for the Lemon Festival. He noticed one thing distinctly different in that there were a number of merchants who remained open. Councilmember Moot: He attended the Water Park opening. It will be a welcomed additional to the community. Councilmember Salas: Consideration to oppose litling of ban on triple trailer vehicles. Item was added to the Consent Calendar. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beverly A. Authelet, CMC/AAE City Clerk Minutes June 3, 1997 Page 10 ._~. MINUTES OF A JOINT A REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, June 3, 1997 Council Chambers 6:28 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agency/Councilmembers: Moot, Padilia, Rindone, Salas, and Chair/Mayor Hotton ABSENT: Agency/Councilmembers: None ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director/City Manager, John D. Goss; Legal Counsel/City Attorney, John M. Kaheny; and City Clerk, Beverly A. Authelet 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS -"~, There were none. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 3. PUBLIC HEARING: 1) TO CONSIDER GRANTING A SPECIAL LAND USE PERMIT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MORTUARY AT 753 BROADWAY LOCATED WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA; AND 2) PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTIONS 33431 AND 33433 TO CONSIDER A PROPOSED PURCHASE/SALE AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE SALE AND REDEVELOPMENT OF AGENCY PROPERTY AT 753 BROADWAY TO UNIVERSAL MEMORIAL CENTERS V, INC. DBA HUMPHREY MORTUARY - In March of 1996, the Agency received an offer from the Loewen Group, owner of Universal Memorial Centers V, Inc. dba Humphrey Mortuary, to purchase the property fbr construction of a new mortuary. At Agency's direction staff negotiated a price for the property consistent with the market value. Since the property is being sold without a formal public bidding process, California Redevelopment Law requires that the Agency make certain findings related to the sale of the property. Staff recommends the Agency/Council approve the Purchase/Sale and Development Agreement and adopt the special land use permit. (Community Development Director) a) AGENCY RESOLUTION 1540 ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-97-10, APPROVING THE DESIGN OF AND GRANTING A SPECIAL LAND USE PERMIT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MORTUARY AT 753 BROADWAY LOCATED WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA b) AGENCY RESOLUTION 1541 AND COUNCIL RESOLUTION 18687 MAKING REQUIRED REDEVELOPMENT ACT FINDINGS AND APPROVING A PURCHASE/SALE AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND JOINT ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS WITH UNIVERSAL MEMORIAL CENTERS V, INC. WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY LOCATED AT 753 BROADWAY, CHULA VISTA, AND AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE SAME MSUC (Horton/Rindone) to continue item to June 17, 1997. Minutes June 3, 1997 Page 11 4. PUBLIC HEARING: PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTIONS 33431 AND 33433 CONSIDERING SALE OF AGENCY PROPERTY TO AND APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT FOR PURCHASE AND SALE AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR 980 LAGOON DRIVE - Staff requests that this item be continued to a Special Joint Meeting of the Re, development Agency on June 10, 1997. (Community Development Director) MSUC (Rindone/Horton) to continue to June 10, 1997. OTHER BUSINESS 5. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) - none. 6. CHAIR'S/MAYOR'S REPORT(S) a) AGENCY RESOLUTION 1542 SUPPORTING ASSEMBLY BILL 1342, EXTENSION OF TIME LIMITS FOR REDEVELOPMENT PLANS - AB 1342 extends the time limitation on new and existing Redevelopment Plans. This item is not covered by the City's Legislative Program, however, the Legislative Committee recommends a "SUPPORT" position. AB 1153 protects the solvency of such Joint Powers Authorities as the San Diego Pooled Insurance Program Authority, of which Chula Vista is a member. It is recommended that the resolutions be approved. (Legislative Committee) b) COUNCIL RESOLUTION 18688 SUPPORTING SENATE BILL 1153, INSURANCE RESOLUTIONS 1542 AND 18688 OFFERED BY MAYOR HORTON, heading read, text waived, passed and approved 5-0. 7. AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS - none. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Beverly A. Zuthelet, CM~//AAE City Clerk