Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1990/01/16 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEEI'ING OF THE CHY OF (~IULA VISTA Tuesday, January 16, 1990 Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Mayor Cox; Councilmembers Malcolm, McCandliss, Moore and Nader. ALSO PRESENT: City Manager, John D. Goss; Deputy City Attorney, Ruth Fritsch; and City Clerk, Beverly A. Authelet 2. PLEDGE OF AI.I~.GIANCE TO THE FLAG. SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: December 12, 1989 and January 8, 1990 MSUC (Moore/Nade~) to approve the minutes of December 12, 1989 and January 8, 1990. Councilman Malcolm abstained on m~nutes of 12/12/89. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: 4a. Introduction of Foreign Exchange Students from the Lions Youth Exchange of Australia: Rachel Robinson and Kurt Bicker. Mrs. Doris Cox introduced the students and Councilwoman McCandliss presented them with certificates and Chula Vista key chains. Mayor Cox welcomed them to the City and informed them of the 1991 Litfie America's Cup challenge from Australia. Both students expressed their thanks to the host families and the community and praised the Lions Youth Exchange program. 4b. City Manager Goss introduced the new Public Information Officer, Ms. Jeri Gulbransen. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: 5a, 10, 11, and 13) Mayor Cox stated staff requested Item 9 be continued to 1/23/90 and Item 14 to be continued to 2/6/90. MSUC (Malcolm/Nader) to continue Item 9 to 1/23/90 and Item 14 to 2/6/90. COUNCILWOMAN MCCANDLISS OFFERED THE BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR, the reading of the text war waived, passed and approved II~anim ollsly. 5. WRtI-I-~N COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter from concerned citizens of Rancho Bonila Mobile Home Park and bttsinessmea in this area regarding truck parking on Anita Street between Broadway and Industrial Boulevard - Gall L. Lefebvre, 600 Anita Street, Chula Vista, California 92011. Recommended that letter and petition be referred to staff with the understanding that a report on the Anita Street Problem, as well as the broader question of how to cope MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 2 with the situation, be brought back to the Council on or before the first meeting in April, 1990. Pulled from Consent Calendar. b. Letter requesting a safer crosswalk system for blind, disabled and elderly people - Armando A. Ramirez, 487 "F" Street #20, Chula Vista, California 92010. Recommended that staff advise Mr. Ramirez by letter that the City is currently establishing a beeper system at the Third and "F" intersection similar to that used in the City of San Diego and, as other intersections are identified as candidates for this system, they too will be considered by the City in the future. c. Request waiver of $175.00 filing fee for permit to relocate the South Bay Family YMCA (summer day .-.i.p site) - Chris Chase, Executive Director, South Bay Family YMCA, 50 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 92010. Recommended that the City Council waive the filing fee as requested. 6. ORDINANCE 2353 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ~l'lY OF CHULA VISTA ADDING SECTION 19.58.410 TO THE ~ VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE TO PROHIBIT FLASHING LIGHTS (second reading) - (Director of Planning) 7. ORDINANCE 2354 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ~l'lY OF CHULA VISTA REZONING (T~RTAIN TERRITORY, GENERALLY BOUNDED BY ADA/PALOMAR STREETS, MAIN b'IllEET, IhrFERSTATE 5/FRONTAGE ROAD AND INDUb'I'KIAL BOULEVARD TO THE EAST, FROM ITS ~i'IY-ADOFI'ED COUNTY ZONE (~$SIFICATIONS TO ~I'IY (~SSIFICATIONS UrlLE~-r~ THROUGHOUT (~ULA VISTA (second reading) - (Director of Planning) 8. RESOLUTION 15455 APPROVING LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CHY OF CHULA VISTA AND CONGRESSMAN JIM BATES FOR THE LEASING OF LEGISId~TIVE OFFICE SPACE - New lease agreement between Congressman Bates and the City of Chula Vista which would run from January 3, 1989 through January 2, 1991. Staff recommends approval of the agreement- (Director of Finance) 9. RESOLUTION 15449 APpROVINGTHE TF. t.I~GRAPH CANYON ROAD SEWER MONITORINGAND GRAVITY BASIN USAGE AGBF. F. MENT WrlI-[ ~ DEVELOPMENT COMPANY - Agreement will provide oppornmity to make connections to the sewer while assuring that properties within the gravity basin will have the ability to use the sewer capacity. Staff recommends approval of the agreement - (Director of Public Works) Continued to roecling of 1/23/90. 10. RESOLUTION 15457 APPROVING EN(~OACHMENT PEILMrr NO. PE193 FOR FENCING AND LA.~)SCAPING IN OPEN SPACE BEHIND 561 CANYON DRIVE - Enclose approximately 2,600 square feet of open space. According the Municipal Code, any open space encroachment request exceeding 500 square feet must be considered by Council. Staff recommends approval of permit -(Director of Public Works and Director of Parks & Recreation) Pulled from Consent Calendar 11. RESOLUTION IS458 APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO PROVIDING FOR THE ACQUISITION OF 1'HE LEASEHOLD INTEREST IN '! PROPERTY LOCATED AT 263 FIG AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT - MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 3 Negotiate acquisition of the approximate 43 year remaining term of lease for a value of $400,000. Agreement provides for City's acquisition of remaining County's leasehold interest in property. Staff recommends approval of the agreement - (Assistant City Manager) Pulled from Consent Calendar 12. RESOLUTION 154S9 APPROVING COUNCIL POLICY CATEGOBtZING COUNCIL / - Improving communication between Council and staff in terms of Council's expectations regarding referrals and improve efficiency and backlog. Staff recommends approval of policy - (Deputy City Manager) 13. RESOLUTION 15460 RATII'YING THE TRANSFER OF A CARDROOM LICENSE - Transfer of cardroom license from Jean Luisi to Aran Zennedjian. City Ordinance 5.20.030 allows transfer with approval of Chief of Police and ratification of Council. Staff recommends approval of transfer - (Director of Public Safety) Pulled from Consent Calendar ORDINANCE 2347 AMENDING SECTIONS 5.20.030, 5.20.110, 5.20.120 AND 5.20.190 AND RESCINDING SECTION 5.20.035 OF THE OtULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE REGULATION OF CARDROOMS (first reading) - (Director of Public Safety) 14. REPORT PRO(ZSSING OF BONITA MEADOWS SUBDM SION AND PRECISE PLAN REGARDING THE ALIGNMENT OF STATE ROUTE 125 - Response to written communication sent to Council from Buie Corporation in which they asked to be allowed to process tentative map and precise plan for property, Bonita Meadow, lying within alternative alignments being studied for SR #125. Staffrecommends denial of request - (Deputy City Manager) Continued to meeting of 2/6/90. * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBLIC HEAPJNGS AND ~F, IATF/) RESOLUTIONS AND ORDIN/M'q(]v_.S 15. PUBLIC HYARING PCS-89-12: CONSIDERATION OF TENTATIVE SUBDNISION MAP FOR SUN-UP, (]tULA VISTA TRACT 89-12 - C01/) KEY DEVELOPMENT - (Director of Planning) (continued to meeting of 01/23/90) RESOLUTION 15442 APPROVING THE TENTATIVE SUBDrqlSION MAP FOR SUN-UP VISTA, (2tULA VISTA TRACT 89-12 - C01/) KEY DEVELOPMENT Mayor Cox noted the developer had requested this item be continued to the Council meeting of 2/6/90. MSUC (Cox/Nade~) to continue the Public Hearing for PCS-89-12 to the meeting of 2/6/90. 16. PUBLIC HEARING PCM-90-7: CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE EASTLAKE I SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN TO REMOVE LANGUAGE PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE THREE PRIVATE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS -CITY INII1ATED - EastLake shall be relieved from any responsibility to provide for public access to three neighborhood parks in EastLake in exchange for five additional acres of fully improved public park land and earlier construction of improvements on the 14.7 acre community park in the EastLake Greens development. The proposed amendment to the SPA Plan will satisfy one of the City's obligations under the agreement. Staff recommends Council concar with recommendation of Planning Commission - (Director of Planning) MINLrFES January 16, 1990 Page 4 RESOLUTION 15461 /M°PROVING PCM-90-7 This being the time and place as advertised, the public heating was declared open. Mr. Bob Leiter, Director of Planning, explained that Council had approved an agreement with EastLake Development Company which provides that EastLake shah be relieved from any responsibility to provide for public access to three neighborhood parks in EastLake I in exchange for five additional acres of fully improved public park land in the EastLake Greens development. The proposed amendment to the SPA plan will satisfy one of the City's obligations under the agreement. The Planning Commission had recommended, 4-2, approval of the amendment in accordance with provisions listed in the Resolution. Staff has also negotiated: 1. the transfer of title to the trail encircling the EastLake Shores Lake to the City for public use and maintenance and 2. developer to construct 12 benches along the lake trail within six months of the effective date of the agreement. There being no public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed. Councilwoman McCandliss clarified that the lake was always closed to the public and this was the grassy area around the lake. The City would be getting additional park areas and improvements through the agreement. Mr. Leiter stated the Landscape Architect was designing improvements and the project was moving forward. Mayor Cox noted the agreement states they will be in place within six months of the signing of the agreement. The public facilities, tennis courts, community center, etc. are being accelerated. Mr. Asmus stated the City was not acquiring for public use any grass area around the lake. Councilwoman McCandliss stated she understood this but that the public could enjoy the lake and utilize the benches. Councilman Malcolm stated he was against the transfer from public to private of any open space and questioned whether the transfer had already taken place. Mr. Asmus stated the action by the Planning Commission was seen as a first step and with action by the Council tonight this issue would be completed. Councilman Malcolm stated if the park is going from public to private, it shouldn't be removed before the other neighborhood parks are built. He also stated the Council had done some good and bad things with this development and he felt the lake was one of the good things but it was unfortunate the lake was private. RESOLUTION 15461 WAS OIq~F_J~_.D BY MAYOR COX, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 3-2-0 with CounShnen Malcolm and Nade~ voting no. 17. PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-90-21; REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A BOARD AND CARE FACILITY FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH Mnn MENTAL DISORDERS AT 551 'D" :~I~T - YVONNE/~IJ.ISON - Establish a board and care facility serving 49 individuals (primarily veterans) with mild mental disorders. Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study, IS-90-25, and concluded that there would be no significant environmental impacts and recommended adoption of Negative Declaration IS-90-25. Staff recommends adoption of resolution denying PCC-90-21 -(Director of Planning) MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 5 A. RESOLUTION 15462 DENYINGPCC-90-21: ESTABLISHINGABOARDAND CAREFAC..H.rI'YFOR INDIVIDUALS WTrH MII,D MENTAL DISORDERS AT 551 "D* ~.-YREET B. RESOLUTION 1S463 APPROVING PCC,-90-21: ESTABLISHING A BOARD AND CARE FAf:H.rI7 FOR INDIVIDUALS WITH MILD MENTAL DISORDERS AT SS1 "D' S-rREET This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. Mr. Bob Leiter, Director of PInning, stated the proposal was to establish a board and care fadlity serving 49 individuals, primarily veterans, with mild mental disorders within an existing apartment building. He stated it would be a private for-profit fadliP/subject to state licensing and regulations. Due to the need for state licensing, Mr. Leiter stated the Planning Department had reviewed the application from the land use issues. The Planning Commission believed the use could Fat in and be accepted by the neighborhood with a continuing effort on the part of the staff and residents of the facility in fostering understanding and good relations with the surrounding residents. The Commission had one resident speak in favor of the request and letters of opposition from seven surrounding residents. Staff would prefer a location in an interface area between multiple family and commercial districts and a self-contained interior orientation such as a courtyard. If approved, staff would recommend the adoption also of the Findings of Approval and the five Conditions of Approval listed in the report. Councilman Malcolm expressed his concern over 49 residents with mild mental disorders all living in 12 units. He stated the location did not bother him and felt there was an obligation to provide such fadlities. His number one priority was to protect the quality of life of the neighborhood. H e questioned whether there were any studies available on the number of people versus units, sewer, etc. Mr. Leiter stated the facility met state licensing requirements. Staff was concerned over the large number of residents and did not feel the common radiities were adequate for needed activities. The Initial Environmental Study indicated there would be no significant environmental impacts and recommended the adoption of the Negative Declaration issued. Councilman Nader stated he could support the concept and felt society owed the veterans for their service. He expressed concern over density and questioned whether there was any way of assuring that the facility would be utilized by veterans only and not by others such as drug users, etc. Mr. Leiter stated the application contains a screening process and one of the conditions of the state license is that they maintain this process. Deputy City Attorney Fritsch stated the Council would be able to set limits and conditions on Conditional Use Permits at their discretion. She was unsure of what the applicant wanted. Yvonne Allison, 5S1 D Slxeet, Chula Vista, stated she was the administrator for the veterans home facility. All units except one are two bedrooms with a study area, living room and bathroom. The other unit is a three bedroom. There will be four residents per unit - two per bedroom. State licensing would allow a higher number but they have chosen to limit the fadlity. Residents will not be driving and will be required to participate in a work program. Residents will be in the fadlity only for meals, nights, weekends and holidays. The location was chosen due to the one block proximity to the commercial area. She felt with a mix of 50/50 single family and apartments the area was transitional. State law does not allow exdusivity for veterans even though their entire program was modeled for vets. The facility will start with 20% vets the first year, 40% the second year, and phase in to 100%. There will be twenty-four hour supervision, professional staff licensed by the state, and the program as proposed meets all state and federal MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 6 requirements. They plan to work closely with the community and will establish work programs with local businesses. Councilwoman McCandliss stated she did not disagree with the facility and questioned why there were no letters of support from other agencies. Ms. Allison stated a representative from the county and state had spoken at the Planning Commission public hearing but were unable to attend the meeting tonight. Councilwoman MeCandliss questioned the screening of residents and the security plan. She noted there were different levels of cure and questioned who would assume the responsibility for the residents. Ms. Allison stated there would be a full alarm system with twenty-four awake supervision. There would also be an on-site counselor, the administrator was available on 15 minute call and the supervisor was on 20 minute call. The residents will be placed by a hospital and must be able to participate in a work program. When a resident is taught individual and work skills they would then go out on their own. The facility would accept full responsibility for the residents. Councilwoman McCandiiss questioned if the facility would accept substance abusers. Ms. Allison stated the agreement required a five year history on all residents. If they have a past history of substance abuse they must have been through a program and have been clean for one year. The facility prohibits use of drugs and alcohol and anyone abusing this policy would be expelled immediately. Councilwoman McCandiiss questioned what type of diagnostic groups would be included. Ms. Allison stated they would accept bi-polur which includes manie/depressive, schizophrenia, etc. No aggressive behavior will be allowed. Councilman Malcolm questioned whether Ms. Allison had run other facilities and how the residents would be transported to the work programs. Ms. Allison stated she had not but her supervisor had run other facilities. The residents will use the facility van and the bus system. North Island will also pick up residents participating in their work program. Councilman Malcolm questioned whether residents would be drug tested. Ms. Allison stated they would all be tested. She stated the administrator forms the programs and the supervisor runs the day to day programs. Ownership is a private investment. Councilman Moore questioned the difference between this facility and a half way house. Ms. Allison stated in a half way house the residents live and ure treated in the facility. This facility is for bourd and care and the residents go to various programs during the day. She stated 80% of the activities would be outside of the facility. Councilman Malcolm expressed his concern over the adequacy of only a five year background check regurding felonies, violent crimes, sex offenders, drugs, etc. He questioned whether Ms. Allison would accept the condition of a life time test. Ms. Allison stated she couldn't imagine accepting residents with such backgrounds. MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 7 Councilman Nader questioned two men to a bedroom. Ms. Allison stated the men needed the companionship, they needed to learn to trust and develop friendships. One to a room often caused feelings of isolation. Councilman Nader questioned whether City staff had done an indepth evaluation of the adversab'dity of features of the program such as four people in a room. Mr. Leiter stated they had not, the facility meets the state standards and his staff had reviewed the facility for land use compatibility. Councilman Nader stated he had several concerns and would like to continue the item one to two weeks to evaluate specifics. He questioned whether this would create a problem. Ms. Allison stated it would as the property was in escrow and due to close on 1/17/90. Councilwoman McCandliss questioned whether a one week delay would be out of the realm of possibility. Ms. Allison stated no, but that it did not help them. Councilman Malcolm questioned who had been notified of the public hearing for the facility. Mr. Leiter stated only the property owners were notified. Councilman Malcolm stated he felt there was a flaw in the notification procedure and the residents in the apartments should have been notified. Ms. Allison stated they held a public meeting on 12/4/89 and all property owners and tenants were notified. She noted there had only been one person speaking in opposition. Dorothy Nesbitt, 543 D Street, Chula Vista spoke in favor of the project. She stated her property was contiguous to the proposed facility. She felt anything would be an improvement to the area. Jas Roush, 532 Casselman, Chula Vista, spoke in opposition to the facility. He stated he had submitted a letter in opposition. His concern was over the experimental approach being taken and how the facility would expel those creating problems. He stated all people were not notified of the meeting held by Ms. Allison and that he had only been notified by the Planning Commission. Samuel Kelsall, representing Mr. and Mrs. Babb, owners of a residence near the proposed facility requested the Council to carefully review the Negative Declaration of the Planning staff. He stated the Council had raised many questions regarding the facility. He also questioned whether a five year background history was sufficient. Carlos Morino, S31 Casselman, Chula Vista, spoke in opposition to the facility. Avon Jennings stated he had fifteen units across the street from the proposed facility and he had not been notified of the public meeting held by Ms. Allison. He did not feel the facility would be a benefit to the neighborhood. There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed. MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 8 Councilman Malcolm did not feel the facility was a good decision. He felt there was a priority to protect the quality of the neighborhood. He noted there would be 49 mentally ill residents/4 per units, and at times, only two staff members. He stated he could not fully evaluate the project and did not feel a five year background history was sufficient. MOTION: (Malcolm) to accept staff recommendation and al, p, ove Resolution 15462. Motion died for lack of second. Councilman Nader stated he hesitated to support the motion as he could support the facility with changes. Sl/Bb-fll-trrE MOTION: (Nadar) to continue for one week. Staff is to contact mental health agendes to evaluate the proposed program. Motion died for lack of second. Mayor Cox stated he had almost seconded the motion and felt he could support the fadlity if modifications were made. He stated his concern that the modifications may possibly make the fadlity infeasible. MSUC (Co3/Nadec) to continue for three weeks so that applicant and staff can address concerns ~ number ofreside~Is, badeground chec~ and history (felonies, se~ offendeB, substance abuse, violemt aimes, eta) and to identify sites somewhat similnr so the Council could visiL Mayor Cox also noted the Conditional Use Permit allowed the Council to place conditions and the ability to revoke if in non compliance. Mr. Leiter stated the Mayor was correct but that it was difficult to implement conditions on operations versus land use conditions. He felt the Council should make the judgement up front that the applicant would comply with conditions versus code enforcement. Mayor Cox questioned if there were numerous complaints that could be verified by the police if the CUP could be revoked. Mr. Leiter stated it depended on whether the conditions were clear cut versus open ended. Councilman Moore stated he could support the motion if it could all be pulled together. He stated he would like to see inoceased activities for in house times. ~ BUSINESS 18. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Mayor Cox noted it was not 6:30 p.m. and the Council was unable to open the public hearings. He then stated Council would hear Oral Communications at this time. James Lovett, 100 Woodlawn #75, Chula Vista, representing Bayscene Mobile Home Park, questioned when the brochure for park owners would be available. City Manager Goss stated staff was not available to give an update on the project but he would have staff contact Mr. Lover tomorrow. Mr. Lover also stated the park owner was forcing tenants to sip a ten year lease that stated the lessee gave up their city, state, and federal rights regarding park enforcement. The lease also allowed standard pass ./ MINUTES Januaq 16, 1990 Page 9 through for taxes, insurance, etc. He felt tenants were being intimidated and requested the City review to see if the park owner was in violation of City Codes. MSUC (Cox/Moore) to refer to staff and City Anorney to see if there is a violation of any (~ty ordinane~es. Councilman Moore stated there could be possible violations of civil code but the City needed to draw the line on what their responsibility was. The brochure would help to address many of these issues. 19. ITEJVlS pUIJ.Rr~ FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Itm 5a. Letter from concerned citizens of Raneho Bonita Mobile Home Park and b~t~in~ssm~m in ~ area regarding nude parking on Artira Street between Broadway and lndusuial Boulevard. Mayor Cox read the staff recommendation which requested a report on the problem to be brought back to the Council on or before the first meeting in April of 1990. Mr. Cliff L. Harman, 600 Artira Street, Space 4, Chula Vista, representing the Rancho Bonita Mobile Home Park stated the semi tractor-trailers were a menace to the area. He noted that when turning into driveways they had to cross over the center line creating a hazard, and the trucks also obstruct the view of the businesses. He presented a petition signed by all eleven businesses in the ~rea protesting the truck parking on the street. These trucks are often parked for up to thirty days at a time without moving. Mrs. Gall LefebvTe, 600 Artira Street, Space 74, Chula Vista, stated the road was narrow with two lanes and a lot of traffic. She felt there should be a place made available in an isolated area of Chula Vista for truck and trailer parking. She noted there was excessive noise twenty-four hours a day and the view of pedestrians crossing the street was totally obstructed. Councilman Malcolm stated there were existing ordinances regarding parking and noise and felt these should be enforced. MSUC (Malenlm/Nader) to direc~ staff to enfo~e the existing codes of the City and report back to the City Councilman Moore agreed there was a problem that needed to be solved. The City needs a truck park and he felt there should be some type of enticement or possible subsidy to get this developed. Item 11. RESOLUTION 15458 APPROVING AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE ~l'tY OF CHIIA VISTA AND THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO PROVIDING FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE LEASEHOLD INTEREST IN PROPERTY LOCATED AT 263 FIG AVENUE AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Mayor Cox stated the Resolution would not take a 4/5's vote tonight but would require a 4/5's vote when being considered by the Redevelopment Agency. Councilman Malcolm expressed his concern over the acquisition of the remaining Count~s leasehold interest in the property. He noted the City had purchased a semi-new building across the street, which was a better location, better parking, etc. for $110/foot including the land. With this agreement they were purchasing an old building, no parking, bad location for $133/foot not including the land. He felt no appraiser would agree and that the County should lease a space or part of the building across the street. MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 10 Mr, Gene Asmus, Assistant City Attorney, noted Councilman Malcolm's comments made sense, but staff felt they had dear direction to proceed with this agreement. Councilwoman McCandliss stated these issues had been discussed by the Council before. Mr. Asmus stated the County would not accept the offer of modular facilities and that if the City wanted them out, they would have to approve the agreement. The original amount was $690,000 and he agreed Council was paying more than the building was worth, but he felt there were tradeoffs. The County had stated pay the price or reconstruct and they would then stay in the building. Mayor Cox stated this was a key parcel to the implementation of the Civic Center Master Plan. It would be impossible to move forward with the plan unless the agreement was approved. He stated the building had been deeded over to the City by the County in 1982 with no direct costs to the City. The City has been able to provide essential services through the building and he felt this somewhat softened the amount of money needed to buy out the leasehold on the building. Councilman Nader questioned the costs of rehabilitating of the building. Mr. Asmus stated it would be approximately $125,000 which would be paid by the insurance carrier. Councilman Malcolm felt Supervisor Bilbray would work with the City. If they rehabed the building for $125,000 the City would save $275,000 and get the building back free and clear in 43 years. He did not feel it was fight for the County to deal with Chula Vista on this level and noted they have had a good relationship with the County up unti/now. RESOLUTION 15458 OFFERED BY MAYOR COX, ~eading of the text was waived, passed and aFpx oved 3- 2 -0 with Coun,~hnan IVlalcohn and Nad~ voting no. Councilman Malcolm stated he would vote with the majority at the Redevelopmerit Agency meeting. Councilman Moore agreed with Councilman Malcolm and felt the City was getting the short end of this deal and requested all specifics be presented at the Redevelopmerit Agency meeting. Item 13. RESOLUTION 15460 RA'rIFItlNG THE TRANSFER OF CARDROOM LICENSE Mayor Cox stated the Council would deal with the Resolution and Ordinance as two separate items. The resolution does not change the existing ordinance. Mayor Cox asked if there were any public comments - not were received. RESOLUTION 15460 OFFERED BY COUNCILWOMAN MCCANDLISS, reading of the text was waived, passed and nFVtU~ed .nnnlrn OUS~y. OKDINANCE 2347 AMENDING SECTIONS 5.20,030, 5.20.110, 5.20,120, AND 5.20.190 AND RESCINDING SECTION 5.20.035 OF THE C2-1ULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE !RI~tATING TO ~ REGULATION OF CARDROOMS Bill Winters, Director of Public Safety, stated he had no additional comments. MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 11 City Manager Goss stated staff did not recommend Hold'era Poker, the change of hours from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. or the charge by the hand of an mount not to exceed $.50 per hand per player. On 12/12/89, Council had refused to allow playing on Sundays, an increase in the number of tables, increase in the number of players per table, and an increase in the maximum amount that could be bet. Staff did recommend the transferability of license and the visibility of tables. He stated Council has prohibited the consolidation of licenses since 1982 and would recommend Council retain the present ordinance regarding consolidation. Councilman Moore requested each item be addressed separately. Councilwoman McCandiiss stated the staff report did not address the reasons for not supporting Hold-m, change in hours, and change in charge per hand. Mr. Winters stated this had been addressed on page 2, paragraph C, of the staff report. He stated there was no demonstrated need. Councilwoman McCandliss questioned whether staff felt the shift to per hand charge was seen as an expansion Mr. Winters stated it was not expansion and felt it was an easier way to collect. Depending on how it was handled, it could result in higher revenues. He also stated that just because $4/hand could be charged, did not mean the cardrooms were charging that amount. Roger Hedgecock, 3042 State Street, San Diego, representing Mr. A1 Zannedjian, requested support from the Council on the proposed changes. He stated if consolidation was allowed it would result in better facilities. It would also create a free market and result in a better economic base. Robert R. Luisi, 1585 Mendocino Drive, Chula Vista, stated he was against any owner having more than one license or eight tables. He was for allowing Hold-era which would result in residents being allowed to play in their own community rather than traveling outside of the area. Councilwoman McCandliss questioned how many hands per hour could be played of draw poker. Mr. Luisi stated approximately forty hands could be played of draw poker and 25-35 hands of Hold-era ff there was a good dealer. He felt eight players per table was ridiculous and that there should be a minimum of eleven. Fran Burger, 310 Broadway, Vegas Club Cardroom, Chula Vista, stated 25-30 hands per hour would be with a good dealer, the rese~zation allows ten players and Las Vegas allows eleven players. Lo-ball would be 35- 40 hands per hour and Hi-low Split would be 25-30 hands per hour. He requested the issue be settled tonight and felt the addition of Hold-era was important and that the extension of hours would help to compensate for the closure on Sundays. He felt the per hand charge was easier to collect. He was against consolidation and felt it was not needed in Chula Vista. He stated it should be fair for all owners. Nancy L. Palmet, 971 4th Avenue, Chula Vista, spoke in opposition to any changes. She felt consolidation would enable the cardrooms to enlarge which would promote problems such as those encountered in Gardenia. She felt the ability to charge $.50 per hand versus $4.00 per hour was a 500% increase figured on forty hands per hour and did not feel this was what the community wanted. She felt any change would ponder to special interests. MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 12 Don Schock, 853 Blackwood Road, Chula Vista, stated as long as the cardrooms were small they were easier to control. He was against consolidafon or an increase in the number of tables. He referred to the report issued by National City. He stated San Diego did not allow the transfer of licenses in order to phase them out. He felt if the cardrooms were allowed to increase in size the police department would not be able to control them. Dennis E. Breedlove, 4091 Chanute Street, San Diego, representing Calvary Chapel of Chula Vista, stated he was against any changes in the ordinance. He stated he has spoken on this subject before and felt if it wasn't broken, don't fix it. He felt the language regarding visibility should be left as it is. He stated National City had been wise in denying cardrooms and that Imperial Beach and San Diego were trying to phase them out and Chula Vista should do the same. Ron Morrison, 1233 Harrison Avenue, National City, representing We're Your Neighbors, thanked the many people from Chula Vista that assisted them in their fight. He stated we were all southbay communities and whatever one city did affected the others. He did not have a problem with the transfer but did with the ordinance changes. He agreed that if ifs not broken, don't fix it. No one was up in arms regarding the cardrooms in Chula Vista because the current ordinance controls them. If consolidation was allowed, large organizations would start looking and the City could see the formation of small casinos not cardrooms. He requested the ordinance be left intact and the southbay area kept going in a positive and family direction. Mayor Cox stated there were six issues: 1. Hold-era poker, 2. hours, 3. change fees to a per game charge, 4. transferability, 5. visibility of tables, and 6. consolidation. MS'LIC (McCandliss/Cox) to support staff recommendation regarding transferability of licenses to around the ordinance to require three yemm rather than one. Mayor Cox stated the second issue was the visibility of tables and stated staff recommended the proposed changes which would require that tables are to be so arranged as to be in full view of patrons and no doors, screens or other obstructions would conceal players. Mr. Winters stated that his department has never regulated cardrooms from the outside. When policing it is done from the inside with a plain clothes officer. Staff did not see this as a monumental issue. MS (Nader/bleC~ndliss) to ret$~in e.xislillg language. Counc'~woman McCandiiss stated there needed to be an aesthetic balance. She expressed her concern over what could go on if there was not visibility from the street. Councilman Malcolm stated the ability to see into the cardroom when packed was not a deterrent. He felt the City did not police or patrol enough. He felt staff had made good points and they were right with their recommendations. Councilman Moore stated there should be an appeal process so an owner would not have to punch a hole in the building in order to comply. $LIBb-rlKOTE MOTION: (Malcolm/Moore) to leave the e~jaling language ofthe ordinance ~s is and add an um,~dmeat to allow appeal from the appl~ean~s to the zoning a~lmlnlgtrator. Approved 3-2-0 with Couneilwuman Mcc~ndlis$ and Colmeilmsm lqader voting no. Mayor Cox stated the next item would be discussion on Hold-era Poker. MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 13 Councilman Malcolm stated he did not want to vote on items individually as he had a grander scheme. He did not support cardrooms or the lottery and he could not be convinced the rules regarding betting, prostitution, and loan sharldng were being enforced. He stated he would like to condemn them and buy them out tonight. He stated he did not have a problem with Hold-era and wished he could raise the per hand charge to $100 in order to drive everyone out. He was willing to support all four requests and he wanted to be on a committee to review and raise the fees. The revenues to the City would be used to support a person in crime suppression to be utihzed in monitoring and policing of cardrooms. He felt revenues should not go to the general fired. MS (Malcolm/Nader) to approve Hold-em Poker, extension of hours of operation, changes for game playing tO per hand charge, and consolidation with the addition of imrnediate review and inffeasing of fees to the City. He would not support other requests. Councilman Nader requested a separate vote on the charges for game playing and requested clarification of intent on consolidation. Councilman Malcolm agreed to a separate vote. He stated if a cardroom sells the license, they would have to sell all eight tables which would result in one less cardroom and they would not be able to split back into two, all or none. Mayor Cox stated there should be more discussion on consolidation and questioned if there was a problem focusing on Hold-era Poker and hours of operation. Councilman Malcolm stated it was a package which would result in increased fees and a possible reduction in the number of cardrooms. He did not like to separate them and if the package was not allowed he was not sure how he would vote. Councilman Moore stated he could not vote on a package. He could vote on the game, hours and fee but felt the Council should vote on consohdation by itself. SLIBb'IIIIlTE MOTION: { CoX/McCandliss) to set the charges for game playing at $.25 per hand per player. Allproved 4-1-0 with Councilman Nader voting no. Councilwoman McCandiiss stated this was the first time she was aware of the number of hands dealt per hour and she felt $.50 would have been a large windfall. She did not want to expand the industry in Chula Vista but wanted it kept a morn and pop type operation. She felt the change in assessment would address the inequities that currently existed. Mayor Cox stated he was not against consolidation within certain parameters. He questioned staff as to whether policing problems were regulatory or criminal. Mr. Winters stated there had not been a dozen regulatory problems within the last twenty years. The department had not received complaints on loan sharking, prostitution or exceeding betting limits. The only way these would be determined would be to have an undercover officer at all four cardrooms. Mayor Cox noted the existing ordinance allowed one cardroom per 40,000 people and he questioned whether this was a legally defensible manner to control cardrooms. Deputy City Attorney Fritsch stated it was. MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 14 Mayor Cox questioned if the ordinance was modified to tables, i.e. one table/10,000 people, if it would also be legally defensible. Deputy City Attorney Fritsch stated she was not aware of any prohibition or state law that would prohibit this change. Mayor Cox asked Council to consider for discussion the consolidation of licenses and the reduction of tables. If two licenses are consolidated, tables would be reduced by 25% resulting in a change from four cardrooms to three and 16 tables to 12. There would still be a beneficial situation to the owner. Councilwoman McCandliss questioned potential problems. Mayor Cox stated it would put the other two cardrooms at a inequitable disadvantage. Councilman Moore stated it was a new concept and if all four licenses consolidated it would reduce the number of tables from 32 to 24. Councilwoman McCandliss stated consolidation would result in fewer facilities and that existing facilities were not operaling at full capacity. Councilman Moore again questioned why change it. The current ordinance was enforceable, Deputy City Attorney Fritsch agreed the existing ordinance was enforceable but felt the change to tables would also be enforceable. Mayor Cox stated he was not aware of any court cases testing challenges under anti-trust laws. Councilman Nader stated he was not a anti-trust specialist but if there was only one owner allowed in the City he could see a problem but that if it were changed to number of tables and met with the approval of the Police Department and City Council he did not feel there would be a problem with anti-trust laws. He did not feel the City needed to allow all operations to be the same size. He felt there should be a decrease in tables if consolidated and that the Council was under no obligation to ensure all cardrooms had the same number of tables to be competitive. Mayor Cox stated he did not have a problem with the types of cardrooms currently in Chula Vista and felt they were innocuous as far as their impact on the City. SL1BSrii'UTE MOTION: (Cox/Malcolm) to allow consolidation to occur with the provision that if one or more license holdet~ consolidated there would be a 25% reduction in tables. C~ange ordinance to specify amber of tables not licenses. Mayor Cox stated to allow one table per 10,000 population. Mr. Hedgecock requested clarification. He stated the Council would reward only half if they allowed consolidation and he did not understand their logic. He stated that City Attorney Harron had informed them that under the existing ordinance, all cardroom license holders could consolidate their individual businesses under one roof with multiple owners. He stated they were asking for only a small change from this which would be ownership. Mr. Harvey Sousa stated the Mayotis motion was well taken and accomplished the intent of the Council. He felt they should make a statement tonight. MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 15 Councilman Malcolm asked Mr. Sousa if the request was granted if he would be willing to get together to discuss proper fees and whether an increase was warranted. Mr. Sousa stated he would. SUBb'fII'tJTE MOTION: (Malcohn/Nader) to continue these issues for one week Councilman Malcolm stated this should be looked at as a package and he was willing to spend time reviewing. He felt he was being asked to regulate a business he knew nothing about. Councilman Moore stated he was against consolidation. He stated when this issue originally arose he felt the owners should have their day in court and he had wanted this discussed at a Council workshop. SUBb'I'IfIJTE MOTION: (Moore/McCandliss) to take no furthor action on this ite~L Motion failed 3-20 with Cotmdlmemben Nader and Malcolm and Mayor Cox voting no. Mayor Cox stated he voted no and felt Council should wade through the issues and resolve them. MSC ( Cox/Malcolm ) to allow consolidation of licenses with a 25% reduction of total tables. Motion carried 3-2-0 with Cooncilmea~bers Moore and McCandiiss voting no. Councilwoman McCandliss stated she was not interested in expanding the number of cardrooms and that if it was profitable to locate all licenses under one roof they would have done it already. The existing cardrooms were morn and pop operations and did not create enforcement problems. Council needed to decide whether they were going with the status quo with adjusted hours and fees or if the ordinance needed to be readjusted to expand and allow the cardrooms to then become a more profitable business. Councilman Malcolm's package was a expansion and she felt a bad decision. The existing fees cover enforcement and regulation and she was not interested in expanding. City Manager Goss requested clarification of the motion. Mayor Cox stated staff should bring back language next week for approval. Deputy City Attorney Fritsch stated the amendment was to allow consolidation. MOTION: (Malcolm) to have staff start eminent domain procedures on all four cardrooms. Motion died for lack of second. Mayor Cox stated he would like staff to bring back, in finel form for adoption, next week for consideration the following items: 1. Hold-era poker, 2. hours of operation and 3. adjustment of fees. McCandiiss questioned if Councilman Malcolm wanted to see the fees before approving hours of Hold-era. Councilman Malcolm stated he would like to see if the fees justify their requests. Councilman Nader stated he was inclined to give Councilman Malcolm the courtesy of an extension of time in order to review the fees. MS (McC~ndliss/Moore) to not allow Hold-am Poker. Motion failed 2-3-0 with Couneilmembea-s Malcolm and Nader and Mayor Cox voting no. MINIYrES January 16, 1990 Page 16 SUBSriI't/TE MOTION: (Cox/Malcolm) to allow consideration of Hold-era Poker and hours of operation predicated on raising the fees to the City of Chula V'~ta. This item is to be brought back ne~ week. Motion carried 3-2-0 with Councilmembers McCandliss and Moore voting no. Councilman Moore stated in assessing the costs, it should be determined if the fees are self supporting. Mayor Cox stated staff should assess current fee and fair costs per table. Councilman Moore stated staff needed to know what Council wanted to do and how much it would cost to do it. Councilman Nader stated Councilman Malcolm desired higher levels of monitoring. Item 10. RESOLUTION 15457 APPROVING ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. PE193 FOR FENCING AND LANDSCAPING IN OPEN SPACE BEHIND S61 CANYON DRIVE Councilwoman McCandliss questioned staff regarding the recommendation to grant a encroachment permit. Mr. Manuel Mollinedo, Director of parks and Recreation, stated Mr. Triplett had requested an encroachment permit and had not expressed interest in purchasing the property through the Grading Deviation Policy. Mr. Cliff Swanson, Deputy Public Works Director, stated the problem occurred due to the developers design. Councilman Moore stated encroachment was forever and felt the developer should have to take action to correct at his expense. Mr. John Lippitt, Director of Public Work, stated that was correct as long as the problem was caught in time. The tentative map for this area was approved prior to 1980 and he noted that corrections should have been made before the house was sold. Councilman Malcolm stated the home would sell for more with the larger lot. He felt the property should be sold versus issuing an encroachment permit and a fair amount of money should go into park improvements for Bonlta Lawn Canyon. Rich Tripplet, 561 Canyon Drive, stated he did not want to buy the property he only wanted to landscape it. His property was charged on square foot for the Melio Roos in that area. Mayor Cox asked if the general development policy could be modified and if the school district would agree not to raise his assessment if he would agree to purchase. Mr. Triplett stated the requirement of two appraisals was cumbersome and questioned the mail out ballot procedure. Councilman Moore noted that staff recommended to approve and require all landscaping to be approved by the Recreation Department Landscape Architect. RESOLUTION 15457 WAS OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MOORE, reading of the texl was waived, passed and apFtoved ac 1-0 with Councilwoman McCandliss voting no. / MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 17 Councilman Nader stated one lot was not a major point but expressed his concern over the chipping away of the open space. Councilman Malcolm stated he preferred to obtain a letter from the school district and then sell the property to Mr. Triplett. Mayor Cox stated he did not have a problem in issuing an encroachment permit and still have staff work towards selling the property. 20. CriY MANAGER'S REPORTf S) 20a. City Manager Goss stated the Redevelopment Agency Meeting would be on Thursday, January 18, 1990 at 4:00 p.m. Two items have been recommended for the City Council Workshop on 3anuary 2Sth. These include the update on the Otay Ranch planning and the Chula Vista 2000 Steering Committee report. 20b. The Chula Vista population is now estimated to be 131,45S with a 2.95% rate of growth since 198S. These planning figures will be superceeded by state figures and eventually by the census. 21. MAYOR'S REPO RTfS) 21a. Mayor Cox stated he had received a request to make an appointment from the Council to the Metropolitan Sewer Task Force. He questioned whether there was a volunteer from the Council, with Councilman Moore volunteering. MSC (CoX/McC'~ndliss) to ap~'mt Councilman Moore to represent the City of Cliula V'~ta on the Metropolitan Sewer Task Force. Approved 4-0-0-1 with CouBeilmall Moore abstaining. 21b. Mayor Cox requested that Councilmembers get agenda items to Mr. Krempl for the January 29th Joint Meeting with the Sweetwater High School District. 22. COUNCIL COMMENTS 22a. Councilman Moore 22a. Stated a primary direction had been given to staff to provide solid information to both mobile home and park owners. The task was to prepare a brochure that would provide information in layroans terms the key items of the ordinance. He questioned the status of this project. 22b. Councilman Malcolm Had been contacted by citizens in the Country Club Drive area and noted they were displeased with the Council action which changed the intersection only on Sierra Way and not on Palomar, MINUTES January 16, 1990 Page 18 A gentleman form the audience stated he was shocked with the action the Council took and he felt it had violated assurances they felt they had which would treat the neighborhood as a whole. He stated they would still prefer a eul de sac and if that was not feasible, they would ask for equal treatment for Palomar. Palomar was now eartying the burden of increased traffic. He had delivered a petition with fifteen signatures requesting redress of their grievance. Due to the high speeds and wide turns they were asking for reeonsidaration. Mayor Cox questioned whether they would prefer the rem oval of the divider at Sierra Way or the installation of a temporary dMder at Palomar. He stated they would prefer to have Palomar squared off also. MSUC (Malcohn/Mc('a~ndliss) to direct staff to add a temporary batrie~ at the intersection of Palomar. Mayor Cox requested the report be brought back on both intersections in three months and that traffic counts be taken during this time. Mr. Steve Reiner, 9 Palomar Drive, questioned whether the reflective markers were temporary or permanent. Mayor Cox stated they were temporary to allow evaluation. If the decision is made to make the change permanent, the project would be included in the Capital Improvement budget. 22c. Extended an invitation to the Council to participate as a whole in serving dinner at the St. Vincent D Patti dining room. He would have the City Manager check with everyone regarding a possible date. This facility has received the Best Shelter Award, acclaim from 60 Minutes, and has been featured in major periodicals. ADJOURNMENT AT 10:43 P.M. to the regular City Council Meeting to be held on January 23, 1990 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk by: Vicki Soderquist, Deputy City Clerk