Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1992/05/26 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, May 26, 1992 Council Chambers 6:08 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Councilmembers Grasser Horton, Malcolm, Moore, Rindone, and Mayor Nader ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk. 2. PI.I~.I~GE OF P, IJ.RGIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER 3. APPROVAL OF MII/rrES: May S, 1992 (Joint Meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency), May S, 1992 (City Council), and May 12, 1992 (City Council) MSUC (Rindone/Moore) to approve the minutes of May 5, 1992 (Joint Meeting of the City Coundl/Redevdopment Agency), May 5, 1992 (City Council), and May 12, 1992 (City Council) as presented. 4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY: a. Scott Alevy, 901 Avenida Isadora, Chula Vista, CA, with the organization Citizens Rejecting Airport Siting Hype (CRASH) gave a presentation on regional airport options. He reminded those listening that there was an election on 6/2/92 giving the citizens the opportunity to make a decision as to whether they were in favor of getting an airport in the South Bay. He stated that there was a lot of opposition to the hi- national airport. CONSENT CAI.RNDAR (Items pulled: 5b and 10) BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR OFFt/.RED BY MAYOR NADER, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. 5. Wlh I lhN COMMUNICATIONS: a. Letter requesting approval of a one-time July 4th calebration with fireworks in Eastl.~lr... Katy Wright, Project Manager, EastLake Development Company, 900 Lane Ave., Suite 100, Chula Vista, CA 91914. The request has been reviewed by the City's Police, Fire and Parks and Recreation Departments and is recommended for approval subject to staff conditions. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 2 / b. Letter requesting endorsement and attendance at annual Race Unity Picnic on Saturday, 6/18/92 - Tom Galloway, Baha'i Race Unity Committee, P. O. Box 287, ChuIa Vista, CA 91912. It is recommended that this letter be received and flied. Pulled from Consent Calendar. Tom Galloway, 1640 Maple Dr., No. 18, Chula Vista, CA 91911, representing the Baha'i Community of Chula Vista, stated that they were inviting the Council to attend and asking for endorsement of the Race Unity Picnic. The purpose of the picnic was to demonstrate the oneness of mankind. He was not asking for financial or staff support from the City. He distributed Unity brochures to Council. Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney, said that the City could endorse the concept of Race Unity as long as it remained religiously neutral. MSC (Malcolm/Nader) to endorse the event Approved 3-2 with Councilman Moore and Councilman Rindone oppose& Councilwoman Grasser Hotton asked if the brochure would be passed out at the event. Mr. Galloway stated that they would be telling people that it was available in a certain location and that they could go and pick it up. He stated that all material available would be related to Race Unity. Their underlying intent would be to promote membership. SDB~'ITfUTE MOTION: (Nader/Malcolm) to endorse the concept but not the event Passed 4-1 with Councilman Moore opposed. 6. ORDINANCE 2514 AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OF EASTLAKE II PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT FOR pARCR. t_q R-24 AND R-25 CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 5.0 ACRES AND 7.4 ACRES LOCATED WITHIN THE ~ GRRRNS SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN (PCM-92-03) (second reading and adoption) - The request will amend the EastLake Greens SPA Plan and transfer sixty-nine dwelling units within the project. No increase in dwelling units is proposed. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on second reading and adoption. (Director of Planning) 7. ORDINANCEZS16 ADOPTINGTHEUNIFORMFIRECODE, 1991EDITIONANDTHEAPPENDIX AND STANDARDS THERETO (first reading) - The 1991 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code shows improvement over the 1988 Edition. Language and clarification have been stressed. Three major amendments have been added. They deal with overspill containment on flammable liquid tanks, permitting certain above ground ~ammable liquid tanks and regulating storage of empty wooden or plastic pallets. Other proposed amendments are those that have been approved by Council over the past seven years. Staff recommends Council place the ordinance on first reading. (Fire Chief) 8. RESOLD'TION 16633 APPROVING CONFIDENT[ALITY AGREEMENT WITH LAIDLAW WA~'I'I~ SYb'i'EMS - During last year's consideration of rate increases for Laidlaw, Council requested certain information about their operations and finances that Laidlaw may consider proprietary and, therefore, Council directed staff to come back with a proposed Confidentiality Agreement at the appropriate time. Laidlaw has recently submitted a request for a rate increase and the agreement is submitted for consideration. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (City Attorney and Director of Finance) Staff recommended item be continued to 6/2/92. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 3 9. RESOLUTION 16634 AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TWO POLICE PATROL SEDANS VIA A COOPERATIVE BID - Two Police patrol sedans were damaged beyond repair and need to be replaced. The vehicles may be purchased via a cooperative bid from Mill Ford, Anaheim, California on the County of San Bernardino Bid No. W-42. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Finance) 10. RESOLUTION 16635 APPROVING AMERICAN GOLFS SUBLEASE OF THE GOLF COURSE RESTAURANT AND BAR TO PRESTIGE HOSPITALITY SERVICES - American Golf Corporation (AGC) has requested permission to sublease the Golf Course Restaurant and Bar operation to Cbris Campion, President, Prestige Hospitality Services Company (PHS), in accordance with the Agreement between AGC and the City of Chula Vista for the operation of the Golf Course Restaurant and Bar facility. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks and Recreation) Pulled from Consent Calendar. City Attorney Boogaard stated that new information that was not in the Council packets were the recent amendments that occurred as late as 4:30 p.m. that day regarding the provisions of Section 7 of the lease starting on the bottom of page four and going through to page six. The new sublease that Council was being asked to approve was amended in the following regards: in the event that the City provided notice that an agreement for development of either the restaurant premise or the property immediately adjacent to the premise or adjacent to the golf course was going to be the subject of redevelopment or development activity, the lease would automatically terminate not 180 day as ea~ier provided but 270 days automatically after that notice was given by the City. However, the subtenant, Prestige Hospitality, would be entitled, if they so desired, to assert a month to month tenancy if consreaction had not started yet at the end of that 270 day period. The provision for termination runs to the benefit of the City so that the City would be able to assert it as a third part beneficiary of the agreement. It would apply not just to the development of the restaurant premises for the hotel/golf course project but for any other future development project that the City may have in mind. It required the sub-tenant to waive any claims for relocation benefits, good will and eminent domain, relocations or right to participate in the redevelopment project activity. It was recommended that the revised version be approved. He believed it met with complete concurrence of both the sublessor, American Golf, and the sublessee, Prestige. The sub-lessee waived any rights to legally oppose it. Mr. Campion had asked to have in the document the right to politically address the Council and to try to convince both the Council and the various Boards and Commissions to reconsider a development that would result in his termination. He thought that was reasonable and allowed it to be included in the sublease. He asked if there was a representative from either American Golf or Prestige Hospitality present and if what he presented to Council was accurate. He asked that the record so indicate that they both concurred. Mayor Nader stated that the record would so indicate. Councilwoman Grasser Horton asked what Prestige Hospitality's intentions were in utilizing the current employees. Chris Campion, President, Prestige Hospitality Services Company, responded that they had already interviewed the present staff and were pleased with the quality and offers of employment would be extended. He thought the retention rate would be in the high 95%. Councilwoman Grasser Horton stated that the report indicated they had plans to expand and have an outdoor facility. Mr. Campion stated that they liked the side of the building that the ballroom was on toward Bonita Road. They thought it was very conducive to a patio area on that side of the building where indoor/outdoor type of events could be held. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 4 RESOLUTION 16635, WITH THE REVISED SUBLEASE, OFF~IED BY COUNCILMAN RINDONE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously, 11. RESOLUTION 16636 AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 BUDGET TO ADD TWO TEMPORARY, PART-TIME UNCLASSIFIED INTERN POSITIONS IN THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR - The 1991-92 budget includes a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) to perform a Growth Management Program Traffic Study. Transportation Development Impact Fees funds were appropriated for this purpose. It was staffs initial intent to have a transportation consultant perform the Growth Management Program Traffic Study. Staff has reassessed the need to engage a traffic consultant and has determined that it would be possible to perform the study "in-house" if we could hire temporary personnel. Performing the study "in-house" is estimated to result in a savings of more than $30,000. Specifically, staff is requesting Council's approval to utilize funds appropriated in the CIP Growth Management Traffic Monitoring Study project to hire two additional part-time intern positions to collect field data for the Growth Management Traffic Monitoring Study. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works) 4/Sth's vote required. 12.A. RESOLUTION 16637 APPROVING PARCEL MAP AGRF. F. MENT AND AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREE.MEaNT FOR EASTLAKE VILLAGE CENTER - EastLake Development Company (EastLake) has applied for and been granted conditional approval of Tentative Parcel Map 92-2. In satisfaction of Conditions of Approval, EastLake has executed an agreement which is now before Council for approval. Staff recommends approval the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) B. RF_.SOLUTION 16638 AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER AND PLANNING DIRECTOR TO EXECIrFE PAI~f~-L MAP AGREEMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE CITY COUNCIL * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 13. PUBLIC HEARING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VAIJ.R'Y ROAD) - On 4/21/92, Council adopted the Resolution of Intention to construct and finance certain public improvements to Otay Valley Road, east of 1-805, pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 and set the public hearing on the formation of Assessment District No. 90-2 (OtayValley Road) for 5/26/92. The associated resolutions make changes and modifications to the Engineer's Report, overrule protests, confirm the assessments, make CEQA findings, adopt a Mitigation Monitoring Plan, and approve utility and underwriter agreements. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Community Development and Director of Public Works) A. RESOLUTION 16639 APPROVING AGRR~MENTS FOR EXECUTION IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VAt .I .k'ry ROAD) AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN SAID AGR RRMENTS B. RESOLUTION 16640 APPROVING TRANSFER OF FUNDS TO ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VAT .T .~" ROAD) C. RESOLUTION 16641 ORDERING CERTAIN CHANGES AND MODIFICATIONS TO THE ENGINEER'S REPORT IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VATJ.EY ROAD) Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 5 D. RESOLUTION 16642 OVERRULING AND DENYING PROTESTS AND MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS IN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY VAt.t.R'Y ROAD) E. RESOLUT[ ON 16643 CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT, ORDERING THE IMPRO~ MADE, TOGETHEK WITH APPURTENANCES, APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S *REPORT*, MAKING CE(~A FINDINGS, AND ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND A MITIGAIlON MONITORING PLAN REGARDING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 90-2 (OTAY V.AI.t.Ry ROAD) Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, and John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, presented the staff report. Mac Brown, Bond Counsel, stated that it was the formal public hearing relating to the Assessment District process and that it was required by statute and was the final action in the formation process. Upon conclusion of the public hearing, Council would be asked to make a decision on whether or not to proceed and authorize the formation of the Assessment District ordering the improvements and confirming the assessments. Individual notices were mailed to each property owner advising them of their estimated individual assessment. If Council accepted the staff recommendation to increase the contribution, the figures previously mailed to the property owners would be reduced by approximately 15%. The communications received that evening should generally be addressing issues related to boundaries of the Assessment DistricL All properties that received special and direct benefit from the works of improvements should be included within the boundaries of the Assessment District. There may be properties on the perimeter that received incidental benefits but that was distinguishable. Protests or communications could relate to the extent of the improvements. Protests should be limited to questions on the method and the spread of the assessment. The law required that the spreads be made in accordance with the benefits that each parcel received from the works of improvements. Upon the conclusion of the testimony they would make a final tabulation of written and oral protests presented. Dick Jacobs, Assessment Engineer with Willdan Associates, stated that his company had been involved in over two hundred assessment districts since their formation in 1964. He personally had been involved in fifteen assessment districts in San Diego County. The role of the Assessment Engineer was to examine the nature of the public improvements and assess the properties for the improvements based on benefit. The facilities that were to be assessed in the District consisted of a portion of the overall circulation roadway network in the eastern area of the City, east of 1-805. The Otay Valley Road project consisted of widening the roadway to a six lane major street between 1-80S and Nirvana Avenue, a distance of approximately 5,700 feet, and the widening of Otay Valley Road to four lanes beginning at Nirvana and extending for a distance of approximately S,S00 feet. The widening of Otay Valley Road would provide special benefit to those properties within the immediate vicinity that took access from Otay Valley Road or an immediate connecting access road. The widening would improve the existing level of service on the street, increase the traffic flow capacity between the freeway and the various properties and provide a safer corridor of travel due to the medians and the signalized intersections that were part of the project. The properties within the benefit areas included the industrial properties north and south on Otay Valley Road as well as the Otay Rio Business Park. In addition, the Otay County Landfill and the Nelson & Sloan Mining parcel located to the east were also in the benefit area. Since the Otay Landfill was owned by the County and could not be assessed, the share of that benefit would come in the form of a contribution to the District. The widening of Otay Valley Road would benefit both developed and undeveloped parcels within the District boundary. All of the industrial properties within the District boundary would be utilizing the same land use and generating the same amount of vehicle trips per gross acre. For that reason, the assessments within the indusu-ial properties were based on gross acres. The properties within the District boundary were in various stages of development. The question had been raised regarding the recently developed properties that credit should be given for slope areas within the lots. He recommended against that due to several factors. First for the undeveloped acreage and for property that would potentially redevelop, there would be no way of Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 6 \ ./' determining what their slope area was and, therefore, their credits would have to wait until the property was actually designed. Secondly, when each lot developed to its highest and best use, he felt that excellent lot coverage was obtained and from an overall stand point the gross acre method was most equitable. He could not at that point determine what credits there would be for undeveloped acreage and, therefore, in his opinion it would not be equitable to give credit for slopes within developed lots. Credit had been given, however, for frontage improvements to those properties required to install frontage improvements. He felt that based on the Assessment Districes assessing major thoroughfares on the other parts of the City that those properties were being assessed fairly and received special benefits as a result of the thoroughfare improvement. The properties were being assessed at sixty-one cents a square foot and if the recommendation on adding additional City money were approved, it would be reduced by 15%. In his judgment the properties being assessed would be receiving special benefit from the roadway. He looked at the residential area to the north and determined that the majority of those trips to the freeway would occur in a northerly fashion so that area was not included. He had included a contribution to the District as the proportionate share for the County-owned landfill to the north since there was extensive use of the highway by that facility. He also included the Nelson & Sloan property that also used the roadway in a heavy manner as a part of the District. He had not included the overall Otay Ranch area east of the District due to the fact that area would be required to build the same type of roadway to serve its benefitring area which would include a roadway from the eastern boundary to the proposed I-125 as well as the addition of two lanes from the eastern boundary of the District west to Nirvana Avenue. It was estimated that cost to be at least $30 million and would result in a very high assessment, probably about $1.40 per square foot. He had included the Otay Rio Business Park as part of the District. The southern boundary included those properties south of Otay Valley Road and north of Otay River that would take access onto Otay Valley Road. The written protests received to date indicated that there was a protest of approximately 16.9% based on gross acres. Councilman Malcolm asked if there was time to re-do all of it if there was disagreement to the assessment. Mr. Brown responded that if there was a modification in the assessments, if the Council decreased assessments only as the proposed increase in the contribution would do, that could be done that evening. They could reduce any assessment that was previously noticed to property owners by simple motion and/or resolution that evening. However, if they were to cause an increase in any assessments, it would be necessary for the Engineer's Report to be modified and Council would need that document before them to show how the assessments were to be modified. That again would be placed upon an agenda for Council's approval similar to the preliminary approval of the current Engineers Report. The Council then could direct notification to again be given by publication and mailing. There was a twenty day mailing requirement that would be necessary and then ultimately staff could be presenting back to Council the proposed changes and modifications. Councilman Malcolm asked if it was possible to give the benefit of the undergrounding to lower certain assessments versus spreading it evenly. Mr. Jacobs responded that the credit for the undergrounding would basically be spread proportionately to all the properties. If Council proposed to make changes to certain properties by, for example, giving credit on slopes, etc. they would have to determine what the effect would be on the other properties. Mayor Nader asked if the assessments were reduced beyond what would result in the proposed City contribution, for instance by reducing the total scope of work to be funded by the Assessment District, would that involve a delay beyond 6/30/92. Mr. Brown responded that work reduction and modification would not take the additional written notification back to the property owners that he had previously mentioned. If the Council's direction was to delete certain improvements the first question would be could that be accomplished that evening and he Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 7 did not know. He would have to recess with the Engineering Consultants. He said it could be accomplished within a two week period. Mayor Nader asked if they knew how many parcels the 16.9% protests represented. Mr. Jacobs answered approximately 31 parcels out of approximately 150. This being the time and place as advertised the public hearing was declared open. The following people spoke in opposition to staff recommendation: Karl Turecek, 855 Energy Way, Chula Vista, CA, representing Otay Industrial Park. Fred Willert, 855 Energy Way, Chula Vista, CA 91911, representing F.J. Willert Construction Company. Robert & Mary Gunthorp, 789 Energy Way, Chul a Vista, CA 91911, representing Onager Corporation, did not wish to speak but wanted to register their opposition. Doug Kaul, 811 Energy Way, Chula Vista, CA, representing South Bay Auto Wreckers. Dancell de Fabry, 515 Otay Valley Rd., Chula Vista, CA, representing J.T. Racing, parcel munber 11. Jennifer Wilson, Esq., 401 "B" St., Ste. 1150, San Diego, CA, representing Charles Pratty and Charles Siroonian, Ecology Auto Wrecking, parcel number 72 and 73. John Keating, 8989 Rio San Diego Dr., San Diego, CA, representing Charles Pretty and Charles Siroonian, Ecology Auto Wrecking, parcel number 72 and 73. Joe Kellejian, 825 Energy Way, Chula Vista, CA 91911, representing Ecology Auto Wrecking. Edward Marsh, Esq., 505 N. Mollison, E1 Cajon, CA 92021, representing Mr. and Mrs. James McCormack, parcel number 76, 77 and 78. Ken Monson, 1980 Gotham St., Chula Vista, CA 91913, representing Nelson & Sloan. Vince Davies, 4501 Otay Valley Rd., Chula Vista, CA, properl7 owner. Terrance Van Orshouen, 6823 Neptune Pl., La Jolla, CA 92037, representing Davies Enterprises, parcel number 9, 27, 38, and 64. Robert Brady, 1360 So. Magnolia Ave., E1 Cajon, CA 92020, owner of B & B Partners, 505 Otay Valley Rd., Chula Vista, CA, parcel number 12. Charles L. Deem, 401 "B" St., Ste. 1700, San Diego, CA 92101, representing Atomic Investments, Inc., parcel number 5. Larry Cushman, 2901 Fifth Ave., San Diego, CA. John Scott, 5705 Sunnyview Dr., Bonita, CA, parcel number S0. The following people spoke in favor of the new road: Jack Leebow, 19800 McArthur Blvd., Irvine, CA, president and general parmet of Otay Rio Business Park. James Salter, 3901 McArthur, Newport Beach, CA, representing Chula Vista Auto Center and Borst Property. There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed. Councilman Malcolm thought there were special benefits to the property owners in that area. The improvements would improve the area and the property value. He said there were some legitimate concerns though. Any land that was not useable should not be assessed. He asked what the level of service would be if only four lanes were put in and what the projected level of service was for six lanes. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 8 Mr. Lippitt responded that the level of service would be "F" for four lanes. Six lanes would be within the City's threshold of"C" and "D" during the peak hours of the day. He said it was based on projections of the general plan, the Otay Road project and the projection that 1-125 would be built. The City was representing over $5 million toward the project. Staff realized that the extra two lanes were not needed at the time and they were not charging the people in that area for those extra two lanes. Councilman Malcolm said that the assessment for the six lanes was being placed heavily on those industrial land users. He asked what percentage of their traffic would be generated from them versus the Baldwain Company or Nelson fit Sloan when they were developed at a later date. Mr. Lippitt did not have an answer for the exact percentage but did know that traffic generation for the Otay Valley redevelopment area would require four lanes. Councilman Moore asked staff to explain a thirty month interest reserve. Fred Kassman, Redevelopmerit Coordinator, explained that basically the Assessment District would go into existence but no payments would be made for two and a half years. It would be added on to the back end of the bonds and interest would be paid on that and it would increase the cost. Councilman Moore said staff had come up with a number of items that talked about potential reduction of assessment costs per square foot by 15% which would make it 50 cents per square foot. They came to that conclusion by saying the City could use its franchise allotment that was nonally used City-wide which was $640,000. Staff received a good construction bid and waited until the bid came in to see what they could do with that which was $2 million under estimate and special funds were available through June 30 . If the City's general operating fund was used as a basis for bond reserve that would lower it by another million dollars. He asked if that left an excess of $5 million. Mr. Lippitt responded affirmatively and stated he had not included the savings on the contract. Councilman Malcolm said that he was not convinced that six lanes were needed. A ear park was going to be put in that area. He asked staff why it should not be reduced to four lanes. He wanted to see if they could proceed and make the deadline and get the million dollars from the state. Mr. Lippitt said that if the south side did become an auto park that would increase the amount of traffic. One of the concerns and the reason they went to six lanes at that time was so they would know where the fight of way lines should be for the developments on both the north and south sides. If they went with a four lane road and built the right-of-way for a four lane road then there would be twenty-four feet of pavement. Councilman Malcolm asked if the Assessment District could still be done that night changing to four lanes. Mr. Lippitt said staff would have to look at what the impact was. All the engineering basics had already been done so there would be additional engineering costs and there would not be that much of a savings to cut it down. He said staff would have to come back with a detailed cost estimate. He thought they could come back within three weeks, address the issues and still award the contract without losing the million dollars. Mayor Nader asked if staff had reviewed the material submitted by one of the attorneys concerning the number of protests. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page o Mr. Jacobs responded that they had reviewed the submittal and basically his calculation did not include the Otay Rio Business Park nor the Nelson & Sloan parcel in the original protest given to Council. The Nelson & Sloan protest heard that evening was presented by a lessee of the properly. It represented 18.2% of the total gross acres. There was no formal protest on the 58 acre Otay Rio Business Park. If the Nelson & Sloan parcel was included the total protest would be 36.5%. Mr. Brown said the protest count they were computing to determine whether or not a majority protest had been filed would be that of the property owners. However, what they were attempting to do for Council was not only point out the timely protests filed by property owners, but also advise and inform Council that the lessee had filed a protest on that parcel. Mayor Nader asked if there was any where within the project a raised median for which property owners were being assessed, how much that cost and what the justification was for needing a raised median. Mr. Lippitt stated there was a raised median primarily between Nirvana and Brandywine in Phase I. He guessed the cost would be under $200,000 but would have to verify that. He said a raised median was standard for the major speed classification the road was. Between Brandywine and Nirvana there were really no properties with ffontings or driveways and there would be openings where streets come out. The reason they did not put a raised median between Brandywine and 1-805 was because there were a few parcels where their only access was Otay Valley Road. Mayor Nader said he was looking for some safety or design reason as to why it needed to be there. Mr. Lippitt stated that it was a high speed road and a raised median would provide protection from opposing traffic. Mayor Nader asked if the interchange signal was proposed to be entirely covered by assessments from that District. Mr. Lippitt believed that CalTrans had agreed to participate in some of that cost. They had taken that into account in giving the cost estimates for the project. The contribution by CalTrans and the City for those signals had been included as a contribution to the project. It was traffic signal funds, but CalTrans would reimburse the City. Mayor Nader asked if that meant the cost of the traffic signal was not included in the assessment. Donna Snider, Associate Civil Engineer, stated that the traffic signal at 1-805 was estimated to be $289,000. Most of that was funded through the traffic signal fund and through the CIP. She said $100,000 was proposed to be assessed to the Assessment District. Mayor Nader asked if that cost was a total of $289,000 and if the majority of that was due to requirements imposed by CalTrans that would not normally be applicable to a City traffic signal. His recollection was that normally the City paid somewhere in the neighborhood of $80,000 for a City traffic signal and it seemed that every time the City had freeway interchange signals that it had to meet certain CalTran requirements and the cost went up. CliffSwanson, City Engineer, responded that was correct. There was some widening on the freewayramps, as well as some other work that the City would not do if it were two local intersections. Mayor Nader asked why Phase II was needed at that point. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 10 1 ./ Mr. Lippitt responded that Phase II was needed because they were servicing all the properties in the District, including the Otay Rio subdivision which was over 100 acres. They needed four lanes basically to serve that area too, they were being assessed and needed to have adequate service to the project. Councilman Moore had a problem with delay. He would rather increase the City participation than delay the project. He said the right-of-ways should be in place and he would llke to see a median strip in place. If the City wanted to reduce the cost to the property owners then the funds should be shifted somewhere else. He would like to approve the project with a certian amount of protection for the property owners. Councilman Rindone asked if the problems discussed were unique to other assessments. Mr. Jacobs answered that they were not unique, they were difficult projects. There were properties in different stages of development in that area which made it difficult to come up with an equitable spread methodology. They looked at it and tried to determine the benefits. Otay Valley Road was basically a thoroughfare with controlled access to the various properties. They did not see benefit to fronting properties in that particular project. That was a thoroughfare and they were assessing those users of the propen] in the most equitable way that they could. Street projects, in terms of benefit, were the most difficult. Councilwoman Grasser Hotton stated that if the assessments were not passed that evening she would like staff to come back with a report on what improvements the owners were getting credited for. Mr. Jacobs said that the improvements for which the owners were getting credit was included in the Engineer's Report which included curb, gutters, sidewalks, streets and street lights. Councilwoman Grasser Hotton asked if it was correct that the propen] owners were not getting credit for undergrounding the utilities. Mr. Jarobs answered that was correct if it was done previously. In effect there reaily was not any necessity to give any credit back to the propen] owners. Very little of what had been put in was salvageable. They felt that it was appropriate to look at the surface improvements and come up with estimates on those particular items. That was what they did to give property owners those credits. Councilwoman Grasser Hotton stated that when the item retumed she wanted a list of the amounts that each propen] owner would get as a credit and also the amount of money that each propen] owner had already paid for improvements. Councilman Malcolm asked how long it would take to go back to the County to include portions of the Baldwin propen] in the assessment. Mr. Brown responded that basically it would be a reinitiation, in as much as the consent from the County must be obtained by the City prior to the adoption of the resolution of intentions. He guessed that would take them beyond the end of June. MSUC CMoore/Nader) if the Assessment District is approved, that the City will reduce the assessment to a ma'~mum of 50 cents per square foot by assuring that the City's general operating fund will be utilized am a bond fund reserve and the City's SDG&E franchise allocation of approximately $640,000 will be used. MS (Moore/Malcolm) if the Assessment District is approved the City would make a cornmlUnent to work favorably in reviewing improvements for credits, reviewing slopes and sensitive set back areas. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 11 Mr. Brown stated that they could have the Assessment Engineer again look at those but if they did fred a modification which required a reduction in some assessment, they would need to know the source of the funds to accomplish that reduction. Mayor Nader suggested that the funding source be left open as part of the report. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. MSUC (Nader/Malcolm) to have staff return with cost estimates for grading six lanes and for grading four lanes. Councilman Malcolm left at 9:00 p.m. Mr. Brown stated that the resolution actions would need to be deferred to the meeting of 6/16/92. The public hearing was declared reopened. MSUC (Nader/Moore) that the public hearing be continued to 6/16/92. MSC (Rindone/Nader) to continue the item to 6/16/92. Approved 4-0-1 with Councilman Malcolm absent. 14. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION OF NE~F61-1Y FOR ACQIJIPdNG AND AUTHORIZING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE OTAY VAIJ-RY ROAD STREET WIDENING PROJECT - A public heating is necessary for the Council to deliberate upon the request to adopt the Resolution of Necessity to acquire the remaining property tights through eminent domain for the public tight-of-way which is necessary for the construction of Otay Valley Road improvements. The City's acquisition consultant was successful in reaching agreement with all but four property owners covering five parcels which are the subject of the resolution. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) 4/Sth's vote require& RESOLUTION 16644 FINDING AND DETERMINING PUBLIC I~ AND NECESSITY FOR ACQUIRING AND ALrlHORIZING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE 0TAY VAIJ-RY ROAD STREET WIDENING PROJECT ALONG OTAY VAIJ.RY ROAD BETWEEN RCI'ERSTATE 805 AND THE EASTERN BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. Charles Deem, 401 "B" St., Ste. 1700, San Diego, CA, representing Atomic Investments, Inc., parcel number 5, spoke in opposition to staff recommendation. MOTION: tNader) that the public hearing be continued m 6/16/92. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: (Grasser Horton/Nader) to continue the item to 6/16/92. Approved 40-1 with Councilman Malcolm absent. Councilman Malcolm returned at 9:12 p.m. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 12 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Warren Nielsen, 1877 Cabernet Dr., Chula Vista, CA 91913, representing Wanco Water Works, stated that he had a concept of saving and recycling water to be used for irrigation that normally would run off into the bay after a rain. It was in a formative stage. He asked for Council's recommendation as to whether he should pursue his ideas. MOTION: (Nader) to refer the speakers comments to staff and to the water districts via the Interagency Water Task Force for consideration. Motion died for lack of second. Mayor Nader asked staff to inform Mr. Nielsen of the next Water Task Force meeting and that the item be put on that agenda for presentation. ACTION ITEMS None submitted. BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS None submitted. ITEMS PU~J.Kn FROM THE CONSENT CAIJ~I',,IDAR Items pulled: 5b and 10. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. OTHER BUSINESS 15. u~ f MANAGERS REPORT(S) a. City Manager Goss reminded Council that there was a Budget Workshop on Thursday, 5/28/92 at 4:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room. 16. MAYORS REPORT(S) a. Mayor Nader stated that he had been approached initially by Mr. Galloway and some of the other people involved in sponsoring the Race Unity Picnic on 6/13/92. One reason a Counc~ vote was requested was that they had been given to understand by staff that the use of a public address system to make announcements at the picnic would be potentially dependent upon official City sponsorship and endorsement. He was not sure that there was such a Council policy, He indicated that his personal preference would be that staff make its primary consideration in issuing or denying such permits to the extent that sound was contemplated and the convenience or quality of life of the surrounding area as opposed to whether there had been an official City sponsorship issued. If there was a contrary City policy or if staff felt they needed some additional Council guidance, then he hoped the item would be put on the agenda for Council consideration. He did not know what final action staff had taken. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 13 Mr. Galloway stated they had thought the endorsement of the Council or endorsing the purpose of the picnk was more important than the amplified music and they had dropped their request for amplified music in the park. b. Mayor Nader talked to Don Swanson, President of the Downtown Business Association, the previous week and also had an opportunity to discuss the concept of a Downtown Business hicense Tax Rebate Program with the Director of Finance, Lyrnan Christopher. The concept was being promoted by the Downtown Business Association. It would be viewed as a pilot program partly because the Downtown Business Association brought it forward and partly because in discussing the concept with Mr. Christopher it seemed that it would be more feasible if it were initially limited to a relatively small area of the City. The concept would be that businesses in that area would be encouraged to do a general roll back of their prices by 10% and that the City would offer a 10% rebate on business license taxes. In discussing the concept with Mr. Christopher, he thought it might be desirable to implement such a program in a way that participating businesses could display some son of logo. The City, through its newsletter, Public Information Officer, and downtown manager, could advertize and publicize the extent of participation in the program. Those businesses participating in the program would be able to increase sales and the rebate would be financially justified from the City's point of view. They were talking about an increase of $500 to $800 in annual sales in order to do that. MSUC (Nader/Malcolm) to take the concept of a Downtown Businesss License Rebate and refer it to stuff to negotiate with the Downtown Business Association and to bring it back to Council for approval. c. Mayor Nader had been asked by Joe Garcia to suggest that on the Wednesday night taping of the Council sessions that there be a scroll of upcoming City, Board and Commission meetings that might be of interest to the public. He asked staff to look at the feasibility of having that done as a public information item. The other comment Mr. Garcia submitted was that Cox Cable had changed its channel so the meetings were now broadcast on a different channel than was previously the case and that had not been widely publicized. He asked staff to look at that and if that were the case to ask Cox Cable to publicize the new channel so that these meetings continued to be accessible to as much of the public as possible. 17. COUNCIL COMMFaXrrS Councilman Rindone a. Councilman Rindone asked staff for an update on Assembly Bill 3734. Dan Beintema, Senior Management Assistant, stated that the Bill was formally amended on 5/20/92. The proposal brought forth by the League of Cities was the only amendment that was included. It was a cost sharing provision whereby the member agencies of the district would share the cost of the dislrict and that was to be worked out by the districts themselves, but it would provide a cost sharing mechanism. As amended, the Bill was currently pending in the Assembly Third Reading File. As of 5:00 p.m. that evening, it was still pending and was not acted upon. Councilman Rindone requested that it be returned to Council for consideration if there was any substantial change. Councilman Moore asked what the district was. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 14 Mr. Beintema responded that it was the Air Pollution Control District. Mayor Nader said he continued to have some serious concern with that legislation and what it might do. He thought Supervisor Bilbray made a good point that currently they had equal representation under that Bill, their representation would be diluted to the benefit of a larger city. The last action Council took was to take a position of 'no position" on the legislation unless that concern could be addressed. He wondered ff they should not consider a position against that legislation unless and until that concern was addressed. He had not seen a convincing argument presented as to why they should not oppose that legislation as it was currently written. Counc~man Malcolm thought if they had to take a position they should take the position the League of California Cities was urging very strongly and that was to support it. Mayor Nader asked that staff continue to monitor the Bill on potential impact to the City of Chula Vista. Councilman Moore, as the City's representative on SANDAG, stated that they had many debates working with the Board of Supervisors. The common consensus of the subcommittee was that the Board had to do a better job of reviewing what the district director does. He wanted to see that the supervisors dealt with the policy makers like they were suppose to do, reviewing staffs input to see if it was good for multi-purpose entities like cities instead of a single purpose like the District. b. Councilman Rindone, as one of two members of the Council that serve on the Interjurisdictional Task Force for Otay Ranch, stated that he felt a responsibility to bring to the attention of his colleagues their disappointment, dissatisfaction and unwarranted delay by Supervisor Brian Bilbray in reaching an appointment for the vacancy for the public citizen member at large on the Otay Ranch Interjurisdictional Task Force. That vacancy was first submitted in December, revealed in November and they were looking at practically six months with an open seat and that was nor acceptable. The Council had made a recommendation and voted unanimously to appoint Susan Herney to the Otay Ranch Interjurisdictional Task Force. Council discussed ir extensively and it was well considered. The nominee was a member of the Board of Ethics in the City of Chula Vista and he personally had an opportunity to discuss it on at least two or three occasions with Supervisor Bilbray. He stated that delay was irresponsible. On 5/22/92 he sent a letter to Supervisor Bilbray's office expressing his dissatisfaction as one of the members of the Interjurisdictional Task Force in hopes that he would recommend their appointee, Susan Herney. MSUC (PdndonefNader) to direct the Mayor to formally request Supervisor Bflbray to appoint Susan Herney to the 0tay Ranch Interjurisdictional Task Force. Councilman Malcolm c. Councilman Malcolm had heard what Greg Cox's opponent called him because he voted for a pay increase for himself. He wanted the voters of Chula Vista to understand that the City Council could not vote for any pay increase for itself. Placing the issue on the ballot and allowing the people to decide was the only way Council could get a pay increase. He stated that Mr. Cox had earned his raise. He did a great job in the City of Chula Vista, in the region and in the state of California. The point was that Greg Cox never did any of those things that his opponents were saying and he hoped that people would go to the polls and vote for the person that would best represent them. Councilman Rindone said that there were two important propositions, H and J, on the ballot and encouraged people to vote. Minutes May 26, 1992 Page 15 ADJOURNMENT No closed session was required. ADJOURNMENT AT 10:15 p.m. to a City Council Meeting/Budget Worksession on Thursday, May 28, 1992 at 4:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, a City Council Meeting/Budget Worksession on Monday, June 1, 1992 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room, and then to the Regular City Council Meeting on June 2, 1992 at 4:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. A Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency convened at 10:16 p.m. and adjourned at 10:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk Ca~a J. Griffin, Administrative Secretary