Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1992/05/12 MI~ OF A REGULAR M~ETING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, May 12, 1992 Counc~ Chambers 6:05 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers Grasser Horton, Malcolm, Moore, Rindone (arrived 6:08 p.m.), and Mayor Nader ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. pI.Er~GE OF AI.LEGIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 21, 1992 MSC (Moore/Malcolm) to approve the minutes of April 21, 1992 as presented. Approval 4-0-I wi[h Coundlman Rindone absent. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: a. Presentation of Certificate of recognition and reward for reporting grafii~ vanaallsxn re~lting in a convictiota The Certificate of Recognition and reward was presented to Rechel Robert for reporting graffiti vandalism resulting in a conviction. b. Prodalmlng the week of May 10 - 16, 1992 as *CHIROPRACTIC WF--IJ-NF..-o~ WEEIe. The proclamation was presented by Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm to Dr. Harold Young, San Diego County Chiropractic Society. c. Proclaiming the week of May 17 - 2.3, 1992 as 'NATIONAL PUBLIC WORES W'~-R~. The proclamation was presented by Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm to 5ohn Lippitt, Director of Public Works for the City of Chula Vista. d. Proclaiming the week of May 10 - 16, 1992 as *NATIONAL HOSPITAL WEEIe. The proclamation was presented by Mayor Pro Tempore Malcolm to Jim Lott, President of the Hospital Council of San Diego and Imperial Counties, Diane Youhe representing Scripps Hospital, and Rick Coom from CommunityHospital of Chula Vista. CONSENT CALENDAR (Item pulled: 12) BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CAIJ~NDAR, AS AMENDED, OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MOORE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. 5. WRiTfEN COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter requesting support of a Resolution supporting the acquisition of public land for a Pilipino- American multi-cultural center - Paul D. Ones, Chairman, Council of P~ipino-American Organizations of San Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 2 · / Diego County, Inc., P.O. Box 8806S6, San Diego, CA 92108, SS0 E. 8th Street, Suite 6, National City, CA 919S0. It is recommended that the request be referred to staff for further review and report back to Council. 6. RESOLUTION 16617 AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF VARIOUS POLICE DEPARTMENT FUNDS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFORE - The Chief of Police has identified a variety of supplies and services for which funds are available in the Asset Seizure Fund and the FY 1991/92 Police Department budget. Staff is requesting authorization m expend funds. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Police Chief) 4/Sth's vote required. 7. RESOLUTION 16618 A~G DONATION AND AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE TO PURCHASE A "DROP-PHONE"* AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR The Police Department recently received a $5,000 donation from Robert R. Sutherland. Mr. Sutherland is a local businessman and President of the San Diego Crime Commission. The donation is designated to fund the purchase of a drop-phone for use by the Police Department S.W.kT. team. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Police Chief) 4/5th's vote required. Councilman Malcolm requested that a letter of appreciation be sent from the Mayor's Office to Mr. Sutherland regarding his $5,000 donation. 8. RESOLUTION 16619 AUTHORIZING AND SUPPORTING SUBMITTAL OF GRANT APPLICATION TO THE SAN DIEGO REGIONAL FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES FOUNDATION FOR FUNDING OF FIRE COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT, SUPPORTING THE CITY'S FIRE AND DISASTER PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM - Staff is requesting authorization to submit a grant application to the San Diego Regional Fire and Emergency Services Foundation for funding of fire communications equipment. Staff recommends approval of the resolution, (Fire Chief) 9. RESOLUTION 16620 APPROVING THE FOURTH AMENDED UNIFIED SAN DIEGO COUNTY EMERGENCY SERVICES AGRRF-MENT - The City has been a member of the Unified Disaster Council, established by the Emergency Services Agreement, since 1961. The Fourth Amendment Emergency Services Agreement incorporates changes recommended by the Ad Hoc Task Force, the HIRT Policy Committee, and the Unified Disaster Council. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Fire Chief) 10. RESOLUTION 16611 APPROV1NG AGI~F. MENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, SOUTHWESTERN COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, AND THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FOR CONSTRUCTI ON, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATING THE SOUTH'VVESTERN COLLEGE TRANSIT CENTER - The agreement authorizes the County to proceed with construction of the Southwestern College Transit Center and defines maintenance responsibilities between the college and the City after the Center is built. Staff requests Council continue to the meeting of 5/19/92. (Director of Public Works) Continued from n~e 5/5/92 meeting. Amended staff recommendation to remove Resolution 16611 from the agenda in order to check several issues, Le. cost, design, and language of agreement 11. RESOLUTION 16621 APPROVING SECOND AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH ROBERT BEIN, WILLIAM FROST AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES IN CONNECT[ON WITH THE IMPROVEMENT OF BROADWAY BETWEEN L STREET AND NAPLES STREET IN THE ul i x' OF CHULA VISTA - On 12/20//90, Council approved an agreement with Robert Bein, William Frost and Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 3 Associates, Inc. for the preparation of construction documents and plans necessary for the reconstruction of Broadway between "L~ Street and Naples Street. A tirst amendment was approved on 2/4/92, which provided additional engineering services for inclusion of a major storm drain in the project. Certain tasks which require additional engineering services that were unanticipated need to be added in order to complete the final construction plans. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) 12. RESOLDTION 16622 GRANTING EASEMENT TO OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY AT 4045 PALM DRIVE FOR WATER SERVICE THROUGH el'IT OPEN SPACE AND APPROVING AGI~PPMENT WITH SAID OWNER - Mr. and Mrs. Thiang Chu are planning to build a home at 4045 Palm Drive. The most practical and economical way of receiving water service with sufficient pressure is to have a remote service installed through City open space. In order to have a meter installed, Sweetwater Authority requires the owners provide evidence of a grant of easement by the City for the pipeline from Greenwood Place to the owner's lot. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works and Director Parks and Recreation) Pulled from the Consent Calendar. Councilman Malcolm felt the City should receive fair market value for anything sold or given ro the public. He did not feel staff took the correct approach in determining the value of the easement through the open space and had a hard time believing the City was not giving a gift to someone outside the City limits. He would like to see $2,500 going to the City and $2,500 going to the Open Space District. It was a complicated issue and the problem was that to come up with a policy, the value of open space would have to be decided. It was property no one would buy but issues such as who wanted to use it, why, what alternatives were available would also have to be studied. Everything would have to be considered and any appraisal would be arbitrary. Councilwoman Grasser Horton questioned how staff had arrived at the $1,720 fee. Mr. Swanson responded that staff had worked with the contracted appraiser. It was his informal estimate that the open space was worth $5,000 to $10,000 per acre. Councilman Rindone stated he was uncomfortable with an arbitrary figure. He felt a resolution to accommodate not only fair market value or at least reasonableness on the part of the City would be to come up with a policy that stated "not to exceed 10% of what the least minimal alternative would be" or something similar. He could not support any figure without some consistency or guidelines being added to insure that there was some type of return. He would like to see staff return with a policy of that type and also address a long term way of addressing similar issues in the future. Councilman Moore questioned whether the time frame for the applicant was critical. He liked the idea of consistency of guidelines and felt they should deal with non-residents of the City as well as non-residents of the open space district. If a form of full cost recovery plus the cost of doing business in an open space district was reviewed he felt a formula could be established. Mr. Lippitt informed Council that a two week delay would not create a problem. MS (Moore/Nader) to defer action for one week for staff to prepare consistency guidelines for non-city residents and non-open space residents, full cost recovery and cost of doing business in open space districts. AI Celia, 8716 VanHorn Street, La Mesa, CA, representing Mr. Chu, stated the properly to the north of the property already had an easement and water was within 200 feet of Mr. Chu's property. He then gave a brief history of the project. Minutes May12, 1992 Page 4 .) Mayor Nader referred to the staff report which indicated the proposed easement partially coincided with an existing easement. He felt the easement would impact those paying into the open space district more than anyone else and that their input should be obtained in future projects. SUIBTITLVrE MOTION: (Malcolm/Moore) to charge the propex'ty owner $2,000 to the City of Clmla Vista and $2,500 to the Open Space District. Councilwoman Grasser Hotton stated she would support the motion because she felt that the formula utilized by the staff was incorrect. She felt that the argument could be made that the open space was worth more than the $5,000 to $10,000 to that particular property owner. Mayor Nader asked Mr. Celia whether the owner would feel that was reasonable or acceptable. Mr. Celia responded that he was unsure, it was just another cost. He would have to check with the property owner. Councilman Rindone felt the action being taken was ludicrous. The issue was more than granting an easement to one properly owner. The issue was to come up with a policy/procedure to deal with those kinds of situations and not have Council sit and negotiate a fee. He urged his colleagues to defeat the motion and approve the original motion to continue for one week. It was another example of planning before processing. Councilman Malcolm agreed that the City needed a policy, but a policy could not be done in one week as it was a complex issue. He was trying to make a decision that gave more to the City than staff was recommending and not delaying the project. He felt it was a compromise. AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Nader) if the $5,000 is not acceptable to the property owner, the property owner at his option may instead cause the item to be brought back before Council at a later time. Motion died for lack of second, AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Grasser Horton/Moore) concur with the $5,000, direct staff to come back to Council with a report regarding consistency on the issue, at that time if it is found with the new formula that the rate would be lower to the party they could come back and request a rebate. Councilman Moore felt one way to expedite the project was to have a fiat fee but he still expected the staff to come through with a report as to what the value was to the open space district if being utilized by a non- resident of the City or open space disu-ict. Mayor Nader stated he had a problem if it only worked one way but he was unsure as to whether it could legally work both ways. If the $5,000 fee was not acceptable to the property owner it would probably be brought back. Mr. Lippi~t stated that in light of the budget process it would have to take at least a month, if not two to three months, to come back with a comprehensive report coveting all of the issues. He felt they could possibly deal with the easements but it would take a month. AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Rindone) within two weeks staff will return with the early reporting of the development of a policy and interim proposed fee for the applicant and continue to pursue a comprehensive project and return to Council as soon as possible. Motion died for lack of second. Councilman Rindone stated he could support the development of a policy but his no vote was in opposition to the arbitrary fee. Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 5 VOTE ON AMEND1VIENT: (Grasser Horton/1VIoore) failed 2-3 with Councilmembers Rindone, Malcolm, and Mayor Nader opposed. VOTE ON MAIN MOTION: (Malcolm/Moore) approved 3-2 with Councilme~nbers Grasser Horton and Rindone opposed. MS (Malcolm/Nader) direct sl~ff to bring back a policy on how to deal with the granting of easements, right-of-ways, etc. to address this and other issues. Councilman Moore clarified that the motion addressed open space disu'icts. Councilman Malcolm agreed with Councilman Moore. He knew it would take several months as staff and Council were in the middle of a very difficult budget and the policy was very complex. Mayor Nader stated that assuming the motion passed, the direction from the majority of the Council was to take the time to do the policy as well as it could be done. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAP~ * * The Council meeting recessed at 7:57 p.m. and reconvened at 8:12 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 13. PUBUCHEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-91-24: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF REQUEST TO REDEVELOP SERVICE STATION/MINI-MARKET AND CAR WASH AT 1498 MRI.I~OSE AVENUE - The application, submitted by Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc., request permission to redevelop the service station at 1498 Melrose Avenue with new fac~ities, including new dispenser islands and canopy, 1,800 square foot mini-market/cashier building, and a 750 square foot mechanical car wash. The permit was approved by the Planning Commission on 1/8/92 and has been appealed by Council. Staff recomrneflds that the public hearing be postponed until Council has cousidered/adopted a review process for alcohol sales facilities in C-N zones. (Director of Planning) Continued from the 4128192 meeting. MS CNader/Moore) to accept staff recommendation to postpone until a review process regarding alcohol sales facilities in C-N zones is completed. Councilman Malcolm felt that if the applicant was aware that in this particular location there was already the maximum allowed number of liquor sales facilities and there was a good chance that his application would be turned down by ABC, if he wanted to go forward with the service station/ear wash and mini- market he felt those issues could be dealt with. Ken Lee, Assistant Planning Director, responded that the application still included the request for liquor and they had concurred with the request for continuation. They were not in attendance due to their request for a continuation. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 6 14. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATIONOFASSESSMENTDISTRICTNUMBERgl-1 CI~II~GRAPH CANYON ROAD - PHASE B) - On 4/7/92, Council adopted the Resolution of Intention to order the acquisition and financing of Telegraph Canyon Road - Phase II pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 and set a public hearing for 5/12/92 for the purpose of hearing public testimony. The associated resolutions include COnfLrming the assessment ordering the improvements, approving the Engineer's Report, authorizing the sale of bonds and directing a call for sealed bids. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) This being the time and place as advertised the public hearing was declared open. There being no public testimony the public hearing was declared closed. Councilman Moore questioned whether the Olympic Training Center was paying their fair share. Mr. Lippitt responded they would participate in the assessment district to pay for their development impact fees for slreets. RESOLUTIONS 16623 AND 16624 OM~ERED BY COUNCILMAN MOORE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-1 with Councilman Malcolm absent. A. RESOLUTION 16623 CONFlEMING THE ASSESSMENT, ORDElflNG THE IMPROVEMENTS MADE, TOGETHER WITH APPURTENANCES, AND APPROVING THE ENGINEER~J REPORT IN ASSESSMENT DISrFaCT NUMBER 91-1 CFELEGRAPH CANYON ROAD - PHASE II) B. RESOLUTI ON 16624 AUTHORIZING CERTAIN ASSESSMENT DIb-rFaCT BONDS TO BE SOD AT PUBLIC SALE AND DIRECTING A CALL FOR SEAI.~n BIDS FOR ASSE.C~MENT DISTRICT NUMBER 91-1 (T~I~-GRAPH CANYON ROAD - PHASE II) ORAL COM1VIUNICAT~ONS a. Richard Cook, 1679 Mill Street, c/o 229 "F" Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910, referred to a single-family residence he o~ned located on a C-O zoned lot at 236 "F" Street. He purchased the property in March 1990 in order to establish an escrow office. He then reviewed the various procedures, permits, and fees he had been required to participate in. His out of pocket costs now totaled $41,329.60. He requested that Council focus their attention on the Planning Department and reduce some of the absurd requirements that were being placed on hls property. Total costs of all requirements being placed on the properly would be approximately $S0,000. Ken Lee, Assistant Director of Planning, stated there were a lot of issues and the Planning Department served as the point depathnent for all of the issues collected from other depa~huents. A number of the requirements were a combination of various departments. Councilman Malcolm did not blame the Planning Department or staff, he felt they had done as outlined. The problem was with the Council, the review and variance process was broken. He informed Mn'. Cook that a subcommittee had been established to review the procedures in order to streamline. He requested that staff send a copy of the report from the Economic Development Commission to Mr. Cook for his comments. He did not feel that Council had delegated enough authority to the departments or streamllned the process. Mr. Cook noted that the architect interested in purchasing the property would have to go through the same planning process that he had been going through and questioned why. Mayor Nader referred to the subcommittee and forthcoming report and requested that Mr. Cook submit his comments regarding the report. He was concerned that a lot of specifics being offered dealt with the role Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 7 of citizen advisory boards but he did not feel that was the area where 90% of the problems were. Council may need to go deeper than that and look at the extent of undefined discretion, extent of which it is or is not City policy to look at the economic feasibility, both in terms of time taken in processing an application and level of requirements being proposed, etc. Council did not want to drive the small business person away but make it easier to do business in the City. b. Paul D. Ones, 13178 Carolee Avenue, San Diego, CA 92129, President, Council of Pilipino American Organizations, gave a brief overview of COPAU and their benefits to the community. He requested Council support of the resolution supporting the acquisition of public land for a Pilipino-American multi-cultural center. He then introduced the members of the COPAU Board. Mayor Nader informed Mr. Ones that Council had referred item 5a to staff for review and report back to Council. Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager, stated that the Mayor's Office had been in contact with the Pilipino- American Board and would continue working with them throughout the process. S~aff would return in two weeks with the report. ACTION ITEMS 15.A. REPORT MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF ANY LAND USE PERMITS, INCLUDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, FOR A PERIOD OF FORTY-FIVE DAYS EX(IPT UPON CONSENT OF COUN(]I~ FOR USE OF LAND AS A HAZARDOUS WAb-rE FACILITY - Staff is in the process of preparing the City's Hazardous Waste Management Plan as an element of the General Plan which allows the City to establish planning and siting criteria and processing requirements for hazardous waste facilities. The purpose of the interim moratorium is to avoid the risk of having an applicant claim a right to a conditional use permit until the City has prope~y adopted its planning, processing and siting criteria. Staff recommends Council accept the report and adopt the urgency ordinance. (City Attomey and Director of Planning) 4/Sth's vote required. Mayor Nader stated there was a revised proposal and ordinance on the dias from the City Attorney. City Attorney Boogaard stated the revised ordinance not only dealt with the issuance of permits but put a moratorium on the application for permits except with permission of Council on a showing of hardship. In such a case the Council would have the authority to allow the filing of an application permit on conditions they deemed. At a minimum it would require the permiFree to agree to comply, at the time the permit was issued, to a subsequenfiy to be prepared City hazardous waste management plan. ORDINANCE 2513, AS AMENDED, OFFERED AS AN URGENCY MEASURE BY MAYOR NADF. R, reading of the te~ was waived. Mayor Nader informed the pub]ic that the reason for adopting the emergency moratorium was because of the recent approval by the state of a permit for the AbTech II waste facility near Point Robir~ood in Chula Vista. k was the City Attorney's advise that the ordinance would preserve the land use discretionary rights that the City may have to prevent the expansion of operations and continued operations of that p]ant. VOT~ ON ORDINANCE 2513, AS ~ED: approved unanhnously. B. ORDINANCE 2513 IMPOSING, AS AN INTERIM AND URGENCY MF_.ASURE, A MORATORIUM ON THE ISSUANCE OF ANY LAND USE PERMITS, INCLUDING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS, FOR A Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 8 ) PERIOD OF FORTY-FIVE DAYS EXCEPT UPON CONSENT OF COUNCIL, FOR USE OF LAND AS A HAZARDOUS W/~'I'E FACILITY (mencv) 16. RESOLLrrION 16612 APPROVING AN AGI~RRMENT WITH MAPdO TORERO FOR THE ~ VISTA MURAL PROGRAM - PHASE I * In November 1988, Council requested staff investigate the possib~ity of developing a program which would use murals to replace graffiti in certain areas of the City due to an increase in graffiti vandalism. Since that time funding has been received, an artist selected, and staff is prepared to proceed with the anti-graffiti mural program. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation) Continued from the 5/5/92 meeting. City Manager Goss stated that he had been advised that there were some modifications that staff had desired to obtain with the potential contractor but they had been unable to contact him. Staff was recommending that the item be continued for one week. Councilman Malcolm felt the request to continue should come from Councilwoman Grasser Hotton ffanyone. He did not believe that murals were in the best interest of Chula Vista and stated the contract could not be changed enough to gain his support. Mayor Nader stated there had been a 2-2 vote the previous week and Councilwoman Grasser Hotton had the swing vote. Mr. Torero would oversee the work, after designing it to specifications that met City approval. The actual work would be done by young artists from within the City. It was not only a program for graffiti control but also a recreational and educational opportunity for the young people in the community. Contrary to the staff report, the program had been unanimously recommended by the Youth Commission 1-2 years ago due to the benefits to the youth in the community. He recommended that rather than postponing the item for a week that Council take action on the agreement and then submit to Mr. Torero for approval. City Attorney Boogaard felt the revised agreement protected the City, i.e. retaining discretion over site approval, design, right to remove in the event Council wished to remove it, artist waives the California Act Preservation Act rights of an artist, as well as the federal acts. From the City's perspective there was good control. Staff was just unsure at this time whether the artist would agree to the amended contract. Kay Everett, 469 Emerson, Street, Chula Vista, CA 91911, stated she had been a property owner in the City for over forty years and she opposed the spending of public funds for the program. She did not believe that murals would discourage graffiti vandalism. Money could be better spend on graffiti education and added costs of removing the graffiti. She questioned how widely the program had been publicized as she felt it should have public attention. Mayor Nader stated his office had received one call in support of the program. Councilman Moore questioned if the Council reviewed the product of the first mural and decided that was not what they wanted, did Council have the authority to stop the program without adverse funding. City Attorney Boogaard responded that Council was obligated to go through the site recommendation and design approval for two murals. Council could approve a site and design for one mural and pay for the entire mural and then reject the second site and/or the second design. Councilman Malcolm referred to Councilman Rindone's questions as to whether the City could paint out the mural, the answer was yes. Had the artist sued anyone in the past for painting over his murals, yes. He '1~ then referred to a multi-point program previously submitted by Councilman Rindone which would work with .. the schools towards education and eradication. It also worried him that the artist, once the art was up, would still sue the City. Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 9 Mayor Nader questioned whether in any of the lawsuits referred to if there was an agreement such as the one proposed that gave the agency the right to remove the work. City Attorney Boogaard responded that he was not aware of the contracts in those situations. He felt the City was adequately protected and referred to page 8 of the agreement. He felt it was a matter of ph~osophy as to whether or not the Council wanted to entertain a mural program. MS (Malcolm/Rindone) to file the report. Councilman Moore stated he had a concern when there was a project or program initiated by the City that did not have the full support of the Council. Therefore, he would not support the mural program. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-1 with Mayor Nader opposed. 17. REPORT REQUEST BY ADOLFO C_.AS'HLLO FOR A LIEN AGRRRMENT IN LIEU OF POSTING A CASH BOND FOR THE DEFERRAL OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AT 3344 MAIN S-I-RF. ET - The lessee of the properly at 3344 Main Street is converting part of the building to a Mexican food de-out restaurant. The City has required that he install public improvements along the frontage of Main Street He applied for, and was granted, a deferrat of this requirement with a condition that he post a cash bond intheamountof$12,500. He submitted a wrirten request that the City accept a lien on the property instead of the cash. It has been the position of the City that Council approve all deferrat and lien agreements on all projects other than single-family dwellings. Staff recommends Counc~ accept the report and deny the applicant's request. (Director of Public Works) Clifford Swanson, Assistant Director of Public Works/City Engineer, stated it was not an issue as to whether or not Mr. Castillo had been issued a deferral, staff had issued the deferrat, it was how that deferrat would be secured. Staff recommended that the deferrat be secured by a cash deposit. There had been problems in the past with surety bonds and in 1985 Counc~ approved the recommendation that the City only accept cash bonds or a lien on the properly. Councilman Moore questioned whether the problem with the lien was that it didn't necessarily pay the price later on when the project was brought to fruition. Mr. Swanson stated that was one problem, however there was the possibility that ff the property owner was still not able to come up with any cash at that time, or refused to do so, the City would have to foreclose or take action against the private property. John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated the problem with liens being on the properly for 10 - 12 years was when the project came along, they were then inadequate. A cash bond, by law, would have to be put in interest bearing accounts to earn interest during that period. Councilman Malcolm stated he was not sure that the deferrat should have been granted. He suggested that the City obtain a mast deed for $12,500 with 5% interest added and secure the property. If it came in for less it would be removed. Adolfo Castillo, 57 Whitney Street, Chula Vista, CA, representing Mi Tierro Restaurant, spoke in opposition to the staff report. He reviewed the process taken regarding the deferrat on the properly. He stated he was not sure whether the owner wanted to allow a lien on the property. Mr. Swanson responded that in Mr. Castillo's letter to the City he specifically stated that the owner of the properly had agreed to a lien on the property. Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 10 ) Mr. Castillo stated that there were two people involved in the property and he was not sure that both owners would accept the lien. Mayor Nader stated that Mr. Castillo's letter did not state that there was another party to consider and questioned what Mr. Castillo was asking Council to do. It was the City's understanding that he wanted a lien on the property instead of a cash deposit. Mr. Castillo stated the project had cost him much more than he had anticipated and that his time and money was wasted. He did not feel that any cash bond or lien should be applied in this case. MS CNader/Malcolm) to direct staff to secure the obligation with a lien if satisfactory security' could be obtained. Councilman Moore questioned whether that would be conditioned upon whether the applicant wanted to pursue the project. Mayor Nader stated that was correct. Councilman Rindone felt that staff had made a fair assessment and differential between a cash bond and a lien. He questioned whether the term floating lien was the City Attorney's term for a lien with an interest percentage so that it would be identical to the cash bond and thus the consequences to the City would be the same. City Attorney Boogaard responded that it was a floating amount not a floating lien. The amount would increase based on a compounded interest factor annually to keep up with the estimated cost of construction inflation. He stated he would put in a CPI factor. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanknously. Councilman Rindone referred to Item 19a on the agenda and felt there was a big difference between a lien and cash bond and what was in the best interest of the City. He felt what Council had come up with was an effective compromise, He would still favor a cash bond over the lien or the floating lien as proposed by the City Attorney. BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMIVIENDATIONS None submitted. ITEMS pLIIJ.RI~ FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Item pulled: 12. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. OTHER BUSINESS 18. CITY MANAGERS REPORTf S) a. Scheduling of meetings - On 5/21/92 Council will have a Council Meeting/Worksession for the overall review of the operating budget and CIP, including the Five Year Program. The budget was printed on recycled paper this year and he thanked Deputy City Manager George Krempl and Terry Enos, Principal Management Assistant for their work on the budget. Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 11 b. Participation by elected officials at Trash Summit - The Board of Supervisors as well as other cities in the county were sponsoring a ~ash summit on 5/20/92 from 9:00 a.m. to noon. The City had been asked to send two elected officials to the meeting. MSUC (Nader/Grasser Hotton) to designate Councilmembers Malcolm and Moore as the designees from the City artending the Trash SHrnmlr. Councilman Moore stated he would accept contingent upon staff providing background information. c. City Manager Goss stated that during World War I the City was known as the ~Lemon Capital of the WorldN. He then displayed a large lemon grown in the vicinity of 4th and "I" Streets and stated that due to the size the City may still be the Lemon Capitol of the World. d. City Manager Goss stated he had submitted a memo to Council regarding changing the end of year break from the last meeting in June and the first meeting in July to the first two meetings of July. He questioned whether that was satisfactory with Council. Council concurred with City Manager Go~ recommendation. 19. MAYOR'S REPORT(S) a. Staff approval of liens to come to Council only if staff and applicant do not agree. Mayor Nader stated the item was inspired by Item 17 on the agenda. Council had been told there was an existing Council policy that any lien granted by staff, as part of a deferment agreement on work to be done, had to come to Council for approval. He was not sure that every time that happened it required Council approval and questioned whether it created a subliminal deterrent to agreeing to liens when they might be appropriate. He felt it also resulted in an unnecessary delay when a lien was appropriate. MS (Nader/Grasser Horton) to direct staff to bring back policy language that would give ~taff discretion, ul~ to a set amount, to grant a lien as security for improvements. Councilman Rindone questioned whether the intent was a floating lien. Mayor Nader responded that it could be whatever the policy was that was brought back to Council. It was his intent that staff have discretion up to a given amount to do either a floating lien or lien. Councilman Rindone felt that the floating lien came the closest to the cash bond option. As long as that was contained within the considerations he would look forward to the report. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. b. Process for filling Growth Management Commission vacancies. Mayor Nader referred to the vacancy created on the Growth Management Oversight Commission due to the passing of Hugh Christensen and stated there had been discussion as to whether the Mayor should interview and nominate for consent by the Council or whether the Council wanted to interview applicants as a whole. Councilman Moore felt the GMOC was the heaviest staff supported Commission for the number of times they met and therefore felt the applicants should be interviewed by the Council as a whole. Councilman Rindone stated he would support the consolidation of interviews for the Planning Commission and the GMOC. Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 12 c. Mixed use zoning on Broadway. Mayor Nader stated the reason he was bringing this forward was due to concern regarding the rate of vacancies in the commercial area on Broadway, partlcula~y the northern portion. The City did not currently have zoning in that area which would permit mix uses. It was not his intent to create zoning that would absolutely require that but he would like to have staff develop and bring back for consideration a zoning change that would at least provide that option without having to go through a rezone anytlme an owner wanted to do a mixed use development in that area. He would like the policy to encourage mixed use development in that area as a way of promoting revitalization. MS C~lader/Grasser Horton) to rder the matter to staff to bring back for Council consideration a ~ning change that would allow a mi~ed-nse option on some portion of the commercial area of Broadway. Councilman Malcolm felt Council should direct it to the Planning Commission for their comments and then to Council. Mayor Nader stated he would incorporate the Planning Commission into the motion. Councilman Moore questioned whether it should be restricted to Broadway. Mayor Nader stated he would incorporate *including Broadway~ in the motion. It was his intent that it be emphasized or encouraged in areas that were near transit services. City Manager Goss stated it was a matter of zoning categories. Currently with a CUP it was possible to do a mixed use development under a C-C zone. Under a C-T zone, which was mostly along Broadway, it was not permitted. It would be a matter of conceptualizing what the C-T zone was or rezoning C-T to C-C which would penit it with a CUP. VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: approved unanimously. d. Discussion regarding Second Call Ordinance. Mayor Nader referred to the information and draft ordinance received from ADAPT. The ordinance would permit the City to charge property owners for second and subsequent calls for noise disruptions. ADAPT had recently recommended that the fines be secured with property liens. MS (Nader/Rindone) to direct staff to bring back a second call ordinance and include the proposal to secure any fines with property liens. Councilman Malcolm stated he would like to see a staff report and comments from the Chief of Police regarding the proposed ordinance. He would also like information included regarding noticing propert~ owners on liens being placed due to actions of the occupants. Mayor Nader felt Councilman Malcolm's requests were appropriate. Councilman Moore questioned whether the placement of liens on propert~ due to excessive noise was heavy- handed and questioned whether the Council was requesting an ordinance or a report. He stated there were so many other nuisance noises, i.e. barking dogs, which did not result in liens on property. He felt they were going to far as government. Mayor Nader responded that the motion included an ordinance and a report. He felt it was fair as there was a cost to the City if the police department had to return a second or third time. One of the reasons the ordinance was being supported by ADAPT was because the types of parties where people failed to quiet down were frequently associated with drug and alcohol use which had other detrimental impacts on the neighborhood. Minutes May 12, 1992 Page 13 Councilman Rindone felt an assurance or way to adjudicate the complaint due to a vindictive neighbor should be addressed in the report. VOlE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: failed 2-3 with Councilmembers Grasser Horton, Moore, and Rindone opposed. MS (Rindone/Nader) ro direct staff to bring back a report to Council regarding a Second Call Ordinance and the aspects of the previous motion to be included in the report. Councilman Moore stared the report would address what could be done to recapture the expenses of the police department due to repeated responses to a property. He felt it could include options other than liens on homes to collect the fee. Therefore, he could support the report. Mayor Nader requested that all materials included in the agenda packet regarding the issue be included with the report when returned for Council review. He noted that the City of Chula Vista was the onlyjurisdictlon in the county that had not adopted the second call ordinance. Councilman Moore noted that there were many jurisdictions that were nor enforcing the ordinance at this rime. VOlE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. e. Mayor Nader stated that earlier in the meeting staff had responded that in order for a report to be brought back to Council in one week staff would have to have the report done by tomorrow. He hoped that there would be flexibility regarding the agenda requirements if Council, for whatever policy reason, wanted to have something brought back within a week. He submitted it for staff consideration bur ff other Councilmembers detected a persistent problem then maybe it would be appropriate to bring it up for a policy discussion. 20. COUNCIL COMMENTS - None ADJOURNMENT The City Council met in a closed session at 8:50 p.m. to discuss: Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Appropriate Technologies II Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Vista Hill Hospital Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Trash Franchise ADJOURNMENT AT 9:44 P.M. to the Regular City Council Meeting on May 19, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. An adjourned Redevelopment Agency meeting met at 8:47 p.m. and adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk Vic~ki C. Soderquist, Depu~tY Clerk