HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1992/10/20 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday, October 20, 1992 Council Chamber~
6:08 p.m. Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL C.,~T.T:
PRESENT: Councilmembers Horton Cleft the meeting at 8:38 p.m.), Moore, Rindone,
and Mayor Nader
ABSENT: Councilman Malcolm
ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Beverly
A. Authelet, City Clerk
2. PT.~.r~GE OF AT.T.~GIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None submitted.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Pre~_.ntation by Convention and Visitors Bureau (CONYIS): Appreciation and recognition from
Visitor's Industry for Cit,fs continued support by CONVIS President, Ryan Rinders and Richard Lefteft, Vice-
President of Community Relations.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items pulled: 5b and 6)
BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CAT .~.NDAP,, AS AMF. NDED, OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN RINDO NF~ reading
of the text wa~ waived, pas~ed and approved 40-1 with Malcolm absent.
5. WRI-I-rI~.N COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter requesting a waiver and refund of the conditional use permlr fee for PCC-93-O1 Victory World
Ouffeach Center, Inc., DBA World Harvest Church - Thomas Reilly, Pastor, World Harvest Church, 1008
Industrial Blvd., Chula Vista, CA 91911. This item will be handled administratively therefore no action is
required of Council.
b. Letter of resignation from the Planning Comrni~sion - Joe D. Casillas. It is recommended that the
resignation be accepted and the City Clerk be directed to post immediately according to the Maddy Act in
the Clerk's Office and the Public Library. Pulled from the Consent Calendar.
Councilman Moore stated the Clerk had also received a resignation from Planning Commissioner LaVeme
Decker due to health reasons.
City Attorney Boogaard informed Council that if they wanted to consider receiving the resignation of another
Planning Commissioner there would need to be a finding that it arose after the posting of the regular agenda
and action should be taken before waiting until the next regularly scheduled meeting.
MOTION: (Moore} to instruct the City Clerk to advertise two vacancies on the Planning Cornminion.
Minutes
October 20, 1992
Page 2
City Attorney Boogaard stated there was some precedent several years ago where a commissioner had
submitted a resignation and withdrew the submittal before it was accepted and remained on the
Commission. The practice had been to accept the resignation.
Mayor Nader stated that the letter stated the date to take effect was 10/20/92. He did not feel that the
precedent, unless adopted by Council or in the Charter, would have any legal force or effect. He suggested
that the Clerk rake note that Commissioner Decker had resigned and advertise both vacancies.
City Attorney Boogaard recommended that if Council wanted to deliberate they should make the necessary
findings that it was not an agendized item. It was not identified as an emergency and would therefore
require three affirmative votes.
MS 0Vloore/Rindone) to approve the City Attomey's recommendation.
Mayor Nader stated he would reluctanfiy cast a courtesy vote but felt it was poor practice. He did not feel
the motion was necessary and that the Clerk should post the vacancies without Council action. The Council
Secretary should be directed to poll the Council for an interview date.
MOTION WITHDRAWN: (Moore)
MS (Moore/Nader) to approve Item 5b. Approved 3-0-2 with Horton and Malcolm absent.
6. ORDINANCE 2532 ADOPTING, ON CONDITIONS, THE *CHULA VISTA LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN-THE BAYFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN* AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE
APPLICABLE TO THE BAYFRONT, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
MIDBAYFRONT LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM RESUBMITYAL NUMBER EIGHT AMENDMENT (FIR 89-08)
AND ADDENDUM THERETO; AND MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT, ADOPTING THE MITIGATION
MONITORING PROGRAM AND STA~ OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION - (second reading and
adoption) - At the meetings of 1/14/92 and 2/4/92, Council directed staff to process and return to Council
for approval: a Local Coastal Program (LCP) Resubmittal (amendment), a General Plan amendment, and
a P, edevelopment Plan amendment consistent with the Subcommittee Alternative and including their
modifications and informational items. The proposed Chula Vista LCP R. esubmittal is the document that has
been prepared in response to the Councfi directire. Additionally, the General Plan Amendment has been
prepared to make the General Plan consistent with the LCP. The Redevelopment Plan Amendment will be
prepared following approval of the plans. Staff recommends Council place ordinance on second reading and
adoption. (Director of Community Development) Pulled from the Consent Calendar.
Paul A. Peterson, 530 'B" Street, #230, San Diego, CA 92101, representing Chula Vista Investors, requested
that he be allowed to speak after other members of the public.
Peter Wan'y, 81 Second Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910, representing Crossroads, spoke in opposition to the
staff recommendation. They demanded that the ElK on the Bayfront not be certified because it was
inadequate. They felt that without the new feasibility study it was not known if the environmental
mitigation would be achievable. Consideration of alternative projects and sights was inadequate. Knowledge
of private negotiations with the Port District were unknown to the public and therefore put the public at
a significant handicap to participate in the public hearings.
Mayor Nader stated a study had been done regarding the economic feasibility which indicated that the
project was probably feasible but if it turned out not to be feasible the project would not move forward. The
project would be an enormous benefit to the City fiscally, culturally, and recreationally. The Council took
public action when forming the Council Subcommittee to negotiate with the Port District. He questioned
whether there were conditions included that would require that the impacts on the schools would be
mitigated before the project could move forward.
Minutes
October 20, 1992
Page 3
Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, responded that the impacts on the schools would be
mitigated in the development agreement. The City had evidence of the on-going negotiations and were
eonfident that the issues would be resolved. They were a condition of the General Plan Amendment.
Mayor Nader questioned whether there would be a problem with attaching an amendment to the Local
Coastal Plan Amendment with the express understanding that Subareas 2 or 3 would allow reloeation of the
ship building fac~ity.
City Attorney Boogaard responded that the only action on the agenda was the second reading of the
ordinance adopting the specific plan and not the land use plan portion of the LCP which was adopted at the
last meeting. It would have to be agendized to amend the plan.
Mayor Nader questioned why the subareas could not be designated, more specifically, as reloeation areas
for ship building facilities.
City Attorney Boogaard responded that the Specific Plan acted as a zoning regulation and what the Mayor
was proposing was more of a land use plan activity.
Mr. Salomone responded that the two Subareas were included in the LUP and could accommodate the
relocation of that business.
Councilman Moore stated that the lease had been short termed deliberately so there would not be any action
against the City when redevelopment started. He felt staff should obtain data as to the number of employees
actually employed on site, verify that information and what type of work was conducted in the building.
The building was being leased for a fraction of what it should have been because it was temporary and he
felt it should be tightened up.
Councilman Rindone stated he wanted to make it clear that the vote was not a vote to delay or to push
forward a project. The vote was a judgement call as to what was the best sequencing for proper planning
for the bayfront. If the assurances were there, if the DDA had been negotiated and completed, and if the
City was sure of the financial feasibility, he would enthusiastically support the project. The problem was
the sequencing of processing and he felt the next appropriate step would be to complete the negotiations
for the DDA. The action before Council weakened the City's leverage to negotiate the development
agreement that contained those amenities. The action could artificially raise the value of the bayfront lands
with no concrete assurances of the amenities and financial feasibility. He would like to see the project built
but not when the City did not know what was going to be built. Therefore, he could not support the
ordinance. He was also troubled by outside pressure to take the proper steps out of sequence.
Mayor Nader stated the City had never had a project, that he was aware of, where there was a development
agreement without first determining the approved land use of the project. It was not fair to either party to
go through negotiation of a very specific development agreement, binding both sides, without furst going
through the process of determining what the land uses would be. He felt the City was going through the
proper sequencing. Due to only three members present, he suggested that the item be continued for the
special meeting on Thursday or the regular meeting on Tuesday.
MS (NaderAVloore) to continue Ordinance 2532 to the Special Meeting on 10/22/92 immediately following
the Otay Ranch Workshop with the County Board of Supervisors.
Councilman Rindone felt it was a very important item and should be heard at a regularly scheduled meeting.
MOTION WITHDRAWN: (Nader)
Minutes
October 20, 1992
Page 4
MS ('Nader/Moore) to continue Ordinance 2532 to the Regular Meeting on 10/27/92. Approveel 3-0-2 with
Horton and Malcolm absent.
7. RESOLUTION 16839 APPROVING GRANT APPLICATION FOR COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
RECYCLING TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 - In January 1992, Council
adopted a mandatory recycling ordinance requiring demolition and construction industries to recycle by
October 1992. Additionally, the ordinance requires offices and office complexes 20,000 square feet or more
and all restaurants, bars and hospitality establishments to recycle by July 1993. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Administration)
8. RESOLUTION 16840 ACCEFrlNG CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY CALIFORNIA LIBRARY SERVICES
ACT FAMiT.IF_q FOR LITERACY GRANT FUNDS AWARDED TO THE CHULA VISTA LITERACY TEAM,
APPROPRIATING FUNDS AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 BUDGET - The Chula Vista Literacy
Team has been awarded a California Library Services Act Families For Literacy grant from the California
State Library to develop and offer special family literacy services to adult learners and their young children.
These funds cannot be used to supplant the current totor reading program. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (Library Director) 4/5th's vote required.
Councilman Rindone stated that the school district had received a $300,000 federal grant and suggested that
staff work with the school district regarding inter-agency linkage.
9. RESOLUTION 16841 ACCEPTING FEDERAL LIBRARY SERVIcr~g AND CONSTRUCTION ACT
GRANT FUNDS FOR THE CONTINUANCE OF SPECIFIC LIBRARY REFERENCE RESOURCKq,
APPROPRIATING FUNDS AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 BUDGET - The State Library has
approved the Chula Vista Public Library's application for Major Urban Resource Library (MURL) funds in
the amount of $11,888. These funds will be used to purchase domestic and international business
directories and San Diego area business information resources currently not available in the Chula Vista
Public Library. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Library Director) 4/Sth's vote required.
10. RESOLUTION 16842 APPROVING AGreeMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CI-1ULA VISTA AND
MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC. AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AGI~-I~MENT - On
5/19/92, Council approved $227,790 of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to nineteen
social service programs, including $5,000 for Mental Health Systems to establish a vocational sentices
program at Kinesis South. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires a
written agreement between the City and each sub-recipient of CDBG funds. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (Director of Community Development)
11. RESOLUTION 16843 AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY STREET CLOSURE ON PARK WAY FOR THE
YWCA OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY TO CONDUCT A CULTURAL FAIR ON SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 15o 1992 IN
MEMORIAL PARK - The YWCA of San Diego County is requesting permission to conduct a Cultural Fair on
Sunday, 11/15/92, in Memorial Park and Bowl and along a limited section of Park Way. They are
requesting permission to close a portion of the westbound lane of Park Way between Third and Fourth
Avenue to facilitate the event. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Parks &
Recreation)
Councilman Rindone felt the proposal was excellent but questioned whether the event could be tied into
future activities of the City's Cultural Arts Fair. It was another example of inter-agency linkage.
Minutes
October 20, 1992
Page 5
Mayor Nader referred Councilman Rindone's suggestion to the Cultural Arts Commission and incorporated
it into the Consent Calendar.
12.A. RESOLUTION 16844 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR pAp.~IJ.I~L ~
CONb'IKUCTION, *G* STREET FROM FOURTH AVENUE TO BROADWAY IN THE CITY OF CI-RJLA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA - The Director of Public Works received sealed bids for parallel sewer construction, 'G' Street
from Fourth Avenue to Broadway. The work to be done includes the construction of a parallel 12", 15', and
18' sewer main adjacent to an existing sewer main on "G' Street between Fourth Avenue and Broadway.
Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works)
B. RESOLUTION 16845 AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS TO EXECUTE A
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER DRI .RTING THE SEWER WORK FROM THE BROADWAY PROJECT, *F* TO *I*
STREET
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
13. PUBLIC HEARING PROPOSED FEE INCREASES FOR HARTSO N'S EMERGENCY MEDICAL
SERVIC~_~; - On 5/9/92, Council approved an agreement with Hanson Medical Service to provide basic (BLS)
and advanced (ALS) life support/ambulance services within Chula Vista. The agreement requires Hartson
to respond to 90% of all ALS calls within 10 minutes and 90% of all BLS calls within 30 minutes. Hartson
has consisten~y met these threshold standards during the past twelve months. Pursuant to the agreement,
Hartson has proposed to increase their fees by an average of 5.2% effective 11/1/92. Staff recommends the
public hearing be continued to 11/10/92. (Fire Chief)
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
MSC (Moore/Nader) to continue the public hearing to the meeting of 11/10/92. Approved 4-0-1 with
Malcolm absent.
14. PUBLIC HEARING ADOPTION OF THE 'I~.I.RGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN FEE - In
compliance with the Telegraph Canyon Basin Sewer Monitoring and Gravity Basin Usage Agreement between
the City and EastLake Development, the City entered into a contract with Willdan Associates for preparation
of the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan. This provides recommendations
for sewer system improvements needed to accommodate ultimate wastewater flows in the basin and proposes
,a fee of $184 per Equivalent Dwelling Unit (EDU) to finance the construction of these improvements. This
is a one time fee paid when building permits are taken out and is not an ongoing fee. Staff recommends
Council place the ordinance on first reading. (Director of Public Works)
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, gave a brief review of the need for the development impact fee.
City Attorney Boogaard requested that Council take public testimony and close the hearing. The ordinance
would be brought back for first reading at the next Council meeting.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
Councilwoman Horton questioned why there was a net increase of 297 equivalent dwelling units.
Mr. Lippitt responded that it was primarily due to the upgrade of the EastLake Business Center and the
Kaiser Hospital.
There being no public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed.
MSC (Nader/1~loore) to continue Ordinance 2533 to the meeting of 10/27/92 for first read/rig. Approved
4-0-1 with Malcolm absent.
Minutes
October 20, 1992
Page 6
ORDINANCE 2533 ESTABLISHING THE TFJ -~GRAPH CANYON SE3&'F,R DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEE TO PAY FOR I1VIPROM TO THE T~I.RGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN (first reading)
15. PUBLIC HFARING CONSIDERATION OF ESTABLISHING UNDERGROUND UTILITY DISTRICT
NUMBER 123 ALONG 'E' b'l KEET FROM BROADWAY TO TOYON LANE INCLUDING TOYON LANE, CORTE
I-~.I.RNA AVENUE, AND GUAVA AVENUE (CANDY CANE LANE) - On 8/15/92, Council ordered a public
hearing to be held on 10/20/92 to determine whether the public health, safety or general welfare requires
the formation of an underground utility district along "E" Street from Broadway to Toyon Lane, including
Toyon Lane, Corte Helena Avenue, and Guava Avenue (Candy Cane Lane). Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
Mayor Nader informed the public that he and Councilman Rindone had conflicts of interest on the item as
they owned property either within or adjacent to the district. The City Attorney had advised them that the
item could be continued for one week after opening the public hearing. Therefore, three members of the
Council without a conflict of interest could participate in voting. For the purpose of opening and continuing
the public hearing there had to be a quorum so a coin was tossed and he had won. He would remain on
the dias and Councilman Rindone would abstain from participation.
City Attorney Boogaard stated that because of the opportunity to continue the item at a time when three
members without a conflict of interest would be in attendance, the rule of necessity did not apply and the
hearing needed to be continued.
Mayor Nader stated that the rule of necessity did apply for the purposes of creating a quorum in order to
open the public hearing and voting on the continuation of the hearing.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
MSC OSladerfMoore) to continue the public hearing to the meeting of 10/27/92. Approved 3-0-1-1 with
Malcolm absent and Rindone abstaining.
RESOLUTION 16846 ESTABLISHINGUNDERGROUNDUTILITYDISTRiCTNIJMBER123ALONG
'E' STREET FROM BROADWAY TO TOYON LANE INCLUDING TOYON LANE, CORTE HRI.RNA AVENUE,
AND GUAVA AVENUE (CANDY CANE LANE) AND AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF ALLOCATION
FUNDS TO SUBSIDIZE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SERVICE lATERAL CONVERSIONS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
· Sher Aguilar, 170 "E" Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910, representing the Mission Gardens Home Owners
Association, stated that since the no left turn had been instituted in front of their complex there was a
problem with speeding. The problem was with the traffic going west to east on "E" Street between 1st and
2nd Streets.
MS (Nader/Moore) refer the communication to staff for appropriate enforcement and informational report
back to Counc~. Approved 4-0-1 with Malcolm absent.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
16. REPORT REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT
OVERSIGHT COMMISSION'S (GMOC) 1991 ANNUAL REPORT - The report reviews the Cit.fs compliance
with the Quality of Life Threshold Standards for the period from 1/1/91 through 6/30/91 and provides
recommendations regarding the results of that review for Council action. Staff recommends Council accept
the 1991 GMOC Annual Report and direct staff to take the following actions: (1) prepare the necessary
Statements of Concern for issuance by the Mayor regarding the Water, Schools, and Air Quality Thresholds;
(2) endorse in concept the proposed revision to the Parks and Recreation Threshold Standard and refer the )
matter to staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission for finalization and preparation of the required
implementing resolutions and ordinance amendments for subsequent Council action; (3) authorize staff to
Minutes
October 20, 19~2
Page 7
begin work with the Parks and Recreation Commission on the 20-year implementation strategy m address
existing park land deficiencies for Western Chula Vista; (4) refer the matter of increasing the code
enforcement staff to address visual impact issues to the Building and Housing Department for consideration
in its Fiscal Year 1993-94 budget proposal; and (5) support re-evaluafion of the Fire and Emergency Medical
Service, and Police Threshold Standards, and direct staff to work with the GMOC at some appropriate future
date. (Director of Planning)
Frank Tarantino, Vice-Chair of the GMOC, highlighted the GMOC report on the Quality of Life Threshold
Standards and GMOC recommendations.
Gordon Howard, Principal Planner, reviewed the staff recommendations.
Councilman Moore stated he could not support changing the Parks and Recreation Threshold to three acres
per 1,000 people in the older part of the City. The money was not there and the open space was not there.
He felt Council should use equivalency (formula) which would factor in facilities such as: senior center,
community centers, recreational centers, swimming pools, etc. It was time that parks and recreafional
facilities were tied together. Regarding "H" Street, he felt there should be a supplemental report during the
budget hearings on what would be done for short range, how it would be funded, and what the staff
recommendations were, i.e. what could be done with paint, what could be done with minor interference of
property owners and what would be major interference with property owners. Regarding school
overcrowding, the schools must be on a dual-track system which the districts refused to do. Therefore, the
districts did not qualify for state funding and there would always be overcrowding in the schools.
Councilman Rindone stated he would support a system of analyzing community facilities. The number of
acres of parks in the City on the east side versus the west side was eight to one and therefore he would
support the GMOC recommendation. There should not be a dual standard for the older portion of the City
in relafion to parks. The GMOC proposal would be phased in over twenty years and he felt it was long
overdue. He referred to Item 4, relating to schools, and questioned whether that was really what the GMOC
wanted Council to do. Item 6, regarding schools, there was another issue beyond facilities and that was
curriculum. Multi-scheduling had not proven to be as sound as originally thought. There needed to be a
tendency to justify new schools in total but he felt the GMOC was on the right track with the expansion of
some of the facilities. The report also addressed overcrowding of the secondary schools. That could be
mitigated by the changing of the boundaries in relationship with EastLake High School. He hoped staff
would follow-up on the Work Study Experience for High School Students, Item 8, with the school district.
Mayor Nader agreed with the GMOC recommendations regarding the school impacts. He was concerned
when told that the City was not meeting thresholds or in danger of not meeting thresholds and the response
was not to manage growth but to change the character of the community or to readjust the budget spending
to accommodate the thresholds. Regarding the situation on "H" Street, he was disturbed that staff was
recommending that Council address the issue by making "H' Street west of Hilltop, an old residential area
in the City, six lanes. He felt it would be a significant change in the character of the community which he
would have difficulty in supporting. When the thresholds were first adopted there were different levels of
enforcement for different thresholds. On other thresholds Council stated they were important enough, or
sufficiently related to services, that failure to meet them would trigger a moratorium on growth until the
City could find a way to meet the thresholds. One of those thresholds was police services. Now they were
finding out that the City was narrowly failing to meet the lowest standard of priority one response for Police
Threshold service. He requested that the City Attorney provide Council and staff information on what the
existing ordinances and policies were and what was required of Council. Regarding the GMOC
recommendation to 'beef-up" the Building and Housing staff Council needed to be realistic. There could be
other activities in the department that could be curtailed in order to address the GMOC recommendation.
Regarding the school, air, and water thresholds he felt that letters of concern to other agencies would not
cause the City to meet the thresholds. The City needed to look at tougher growth management policies in
those areas.
Minutes
October 20, 1992
Page 8
)
MS (Rindone/Nader) adopt the GMOC annual report with the following amendments: 1) adopt the GMOC
Park Threshold recommendation, narnine the amount of comrnnnity fac~ities and possibly include in
evaluating the Park Threshold; 2) exempt the widening of 'H' Street to six lanes; and 3} implement the
public ~lfety threshold standards effective this coming year and not delay one year as recotntnended by the
GMOC
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Moore) dlrectthe CityManagerto presentto Council a formula for a weighted
factor as to acreage including: g~ns, pools, and comrnunity centers based on square footage to be included
in the Park Threshold.
Mayor Nader clarified the motion to state that staff was to reformulate the calculation of the Park Threshold
counting those facilities.
Amendment agreeable to the maker and second of the motion.
Councilwoman Hotton suggested that staff consider the Council's concerns regarding the Park Threshold and
bring back a revision. She shared Councilman Moore's concerns because of the cost of land and availability
of land on the west side. She was not sure the City could meet the target goal. She liked the idea that the
facilities would help to off-set the irabalance but felt Council needed more information on how they could
accomplish what the GMOC recommended and what Council felt was reality.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Moore) 1) direct the City Manager to bring back to Council a formula for
weighted facton, acreage included, g3rms, pools, comrnnnity cellter~, schools, bayfront, etc.; 2) direct the City
Manager to bring park expansion potential, south of Main Street, close to population and need during the
budget review period; and 3) direct the City Manger to bring back a report on what the potential and what
joint agreement could be made with the schools by being a full partner in usage of their facilities.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Moore) direct the City Manager to review the zoning, etc. and report where
park acreage could be sighted west of 1-805 and the present usage and purchase cost.
Mayor Nader suggested that Councilman Moore's motions be incorporated into the motion with direction
to staff to include those items in the report they would prepare pursuant to the GMOC recommendations
on how to go about an implementation plan.
Amendment to motion agreeable to the maker and second of the motion.
Mayor Nader stated that figures of eight to one had been talked about but in looking at the report it would
appear that the deficiency on the west side was actually about two and one-half to one or a little less.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Nader) delete the GMOC recommendation regarding additional staffing for
the Building and Housing Deparlment; staff is to look at teassigning existing persormel. Amendment
agreeable to the second.
SUBSH'IUTE MOTION: (Horton/Moore) delete the three acre per 1,000 people threshold and have staff
come back to Council with a revised report in Item #1 (page 18) regarding the Park Threshold Standards,
taking into consideration the information given by Council tonight.
Councilwoman Horton wanted it understood what her concerns were regarding the three acres per 1,000
people and that she was uncertain that the City could meet those goals. She wanted more information in
order to determine whether the proposed threshold was appropriate.
VOTE ON SUBSTITUTE MOTION: failed 2-2-1 with Rindone and Nader opposed; Malcolm absent.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Moore) direct the City Manager to bring back a report, during budget review,
regarding East ~I' Slreet short range plan (not widening the street), i.e. costs and time lines. Amendment
agreeable to the maker and second of the motion.
Minutes
October 20, 1992
Page 9
Councilwoman Horton requested that the report include the lower Sweetwater area available for an active
recreational facility.
VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: approved 4-0-1 with Malcolm absent.
Mr. Tarentino stated that in the past the Council had met with the GMOC in a workshop setting and
recommended it be done that way in the future.
ACTION ITEMS
17. REPORT SUPPORTING THE CONTINUED USE OF THE 1987 FEDERAL AID URBAN
(FALD DI~rIRIBUTION FORMULA FOR THE NEW SURFACE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (STP) OF THE
INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT (ISTEA) - On 8/13/92, the Combined Road
Plan Committee (CRPC) recommended that STP funds for Fiscal Years 1992-97 be allocated as has been
done since 1978 and re-authorized in 1987, 40% to regional agencies (25% CalTrans, 15% Transi0 and 60%
to local cities and the County. The 60% is distributed with each city receiving a base amount of $25,000
end the remainder allocated on a per capita basis. On 9/10/92, the City of Solana Beach proposed an
alternative formula that would increase revenues to the cities and the County, but substantially reduce
regional revenues to CalTrans and Transit. Staff believes that potential cuts in regional programs
implemented by MTDB and CalTrans could prove to be more significant than the benefits realized through
the Solana Beach formula. The report supports the continued use of the current formula. Staff recommends
acceptance of the report. (Director of Public Works)
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, reviewed new information received from SANDAG. Staff
recommended the City continue with the existing formula because transit was suffering other revenue losses.
The regional system funding was important and the $6 million increase would go to help SR125 from 94
to 54. If $S00,000/year was taken from the regional projects it would not be to the City's benefit.
Councilman Kindone stated he supported the original formula. It was a critical topic because mass transit
was a regional issue. The net impact of changing the formula would appear to offer additional support to
the smaller cities but it would result in a significant reduction regionally for other projects.
Carolyn Butler, 97 Bishop Street, Chula Vista, CA 91911, spoke in support of the staff recommendation.
MSC (I-Iorton/Nadex) direct the City's representative to SANDAG to support the original formula~ Approved
3-0-1-1 with Malcolm absent and Moore abstaining.
MSC (Nader/Moore) direct staff to contact the National League of Cities and provide them with information
on the local allocations of ISTEA fun& and report back to Counc~, Approved 4-0-1 with Malcolm absent.
18. REPORT PARKING CONCERNS IN THE 100 BLOCK OF GLOVER AVENUE - At the
6/30/92 meeting, staff was directed to respond to parking problems caused by business parking for extended
periods of time on the 100 block of Glover Avenue. Staff evaluated the request and met with area residents
to discuss alternatives available to improve on-street parking. Staff recommends acceptance of the report.
(Director of Public Works)
Heinz Hemken, 183 Glover Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910, spoke in opposition to the staff recommendation.
He felt the proposal would make the situation worse and the other residents of the area shared his views.
He stated there was a problem with parking due to the business located at 363 rE" Street. Other problems
were noise and air pollution and painting on the location. He requested that Council find an equitable
solution to the concerns of the neighborhoods.
Martin Torres, 178 Glover Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910, was not in attendance when called.
Minutes
October 20, 1992
Page 10
Councilman Moore stated he had reviewed the area and there were 26 vehicles on the site. He expressed
concern regarding emergency response to the property. He questioned whether the painting was being done
legally.
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated that Code Enforcement was working with the owners. As of
10/9/92 there was a new owner, Superior Auto Body, and they were working with the Planning Department
in order to come up with a solution to the concerns expressed. The staff recommendation was to not do
anything on Glover Avenue based on a meeting held with the property owners, monitor the situation, and
work on the Code violations with the property owner.
Councilman Moore stated if there were violations, warnings should be minimal and of a short time frame.
If they were spraying paint illegally it should be stopped immediately and if they continued to operate they
should be fined. He expressed his concern regarding the ability of emergency vehicles to respond due to
the number of vehicles on the property. He requested a memo from staff stating what was allowed on the
property.
Mayor Nader stated that staff had indicated they were finding illegally parked vehicles in the alley and were
citing them. He questioned if there was a legal reason that the area could not be posted so that illegally
parked vehicles could be towed and whether the City had an ordinance that required the business to provide
off-street parking for customers.
Mr. Lippitt responded that he was unaware of any reason that the area could not be posted.
Ken Larsen, Director of Building and Housing, responded that he did not have that information available.
The only access into the building was off of the alley way of Glover, there was not street access.
Mayor Nader stated that the Air Pollution Control District had regulations regarding painting and paint
booths and questioned whether residents in the area had been provided the numbers of who to contact at
APCD for air pollution enforcement. He also questioned whether City staff forwarded the complaints to
APCD for investigation.
Mr. Larsen responded that he was unaware as to whether the residents had been contacted by staff. The
maintenance of a spray booth was subject to frequent maintenance by the proprietor and staff had found
that the booth was in compliance. He did not believe that staff had contacted APCD.
MSC (Nader/lVloore) to accept the staff report; direct that signs be posted indicating that illegally parked
vehicles may be subject to towing; stuff provide the neighbors with APCD information; and foxward the
information contained in the complaints to APCD and OSHA. Approved 3-0-2 with Malcolm and Horton
absent.
ITEMS pUIJ.F.F) FROM THE CONSENT CAI.RNDAR
Items pulled: Sb and 6. Minutes will reflect the published agenda order.
OTHER BUSINESS
19. CITY MANAGERS REPORT(S)
® Scheduling of meetings. City Manager Goss informed Council that there would be a Joint Meeting
with the County Board of Supervisors in Chula Vista on 10/22/92 to consider and obtain information about
the proposed General Development Plan for the Otay Ranch. )
Minutes
October 20, 1992
Page 11
20. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Distribution of Port District reserves. Dr. Robert Pennet, Chula Vista's representative on the Port
District reported that the Port had taken the following action upon requests from the City of San Diego: 1)
request to study a bond issue in order to fund capital improvement projects - action taken was to secure
bond counsel to look at the question of bonding and report back after the first of the year; 2) twelve items
with fiscal impact of $10 million - Sport Fishing CounciI and the Maritime Museum with expenditures of
$100,000, transfer of $4.517 million to fund the operational loss of the convention center, and take over the
City's responsibilities for the San Diego Convention Center Visitors Bureau (15%) - action taken to expend
the 15% ($1 m~lion) for the San Diego Convention Center Visitors Bureau, accept responsibfiity up to $4.5
million dollars for the San Diego Convention Center with a proviso that in recognition of the fact that it was
extremely possible that the City of San Diego would not be in better financial shape next year that perhaps
the City of San Diego should divest itself of the responsibility of the convention center permanently which
would move it to the Port of San Diego. All expenditures were for one year and not an annual transfer of
funds. Those items had nothing to do with the recently passed legislation which would have facfiitated the
actual transfer of funds from the Port to the cities. That according to their counsel was constitutionally
flawed.
Mayor Nader stated he was concerned with the impact that the expenditure to operate the Convention
Center could have on the Port CIP program. He hoped that if the Port was to bear the cost of operating the
Center they would take it over an operate it on behalf of the entire region. If there were to be compensating
cuts in Port expenditures he felt those should come in other projects that the City of San Diego had
requested. The $8 million the Port voted on for the undergrounding of the trolley would be just
compensation for the take over of the City of San Diego's obligation for running the Convention Center.
There had been a proposal made by the City of San Diego to take another $100 million of Port funds for
expansion of the existing Convention Center for virtually the sole benefit of the City of San Diego. He hoped
that the convention center expansion program would be put on the back bumer until such time all the
projects in the southbay were completed. Other projects requested by the City of San Diego should be
reconsidered in order to make the Port and the region whole. He would like to see those comments taken
back to the Port Commissioners.
Councilman Kindone stated he was opposed to the additional $16 million the City of San Diego was seeking
from the Port. He felt the Port may want to relook at the $8 million as it was contrary to the original plans
and design. He questioned if there were guidelines provided by the Commission as to the total amount of
bonding and what their definition was of CIP.
Dr. Penner stated they were unaware of what their bonding capability was and their direction had been to
secure a bond consultant who would tell them of their bonding limitations. There was also no stipulation
that if the Port was able to bond that they would do so and no parameters set as to what it would be used
for. There were no limitations on the capital improvements. The Port would look at the entire capital
improvement project list in February.
City Manager Goss stated the City currently had agreements for maintenance of the park and police and fire
services on non-taxpaying portions of the tide lands. The only thing left would be the Nautical Activity
Center which could qualify for reimbursement similar to the convention center. It was his understanding
that the previous mayor may have made an agreement with some representatives of the Port that if the Port
would build it the City would operate it. To his knowledge it was not something that the Council had ever
approved nor the Port Commission. That was an issue that needed to be addressed in the future.
Mayor Nader stated there was a Worksession/Meeting that would be held regarding the Port Revenues
immediately following the Joint Council/Board of Supervisors meeting to be held on Thursday, 10/20/92.
b. Mayor Nader informed the public that he would be delivering the State of the City Address for 1992
at the 10/27/92 meeting.
Minutes
October 20, 1992
Page 12
c. Policy direction to staff on relocation mobile home park. Mayor Nader stated that staff had been
negotiating with a non-profit organization, COACH, and with the owner of Bayscene to facilitate a deal
under which the non-profit would acquire ownership and would operate it on behalf of the residents end
would also serve as a relocation facility. He felt staff, in pursuing potential acquisition, was pursuing the
policy as set by Council. He also felt there was some doubt as to whether it was Councfl's intent for staff
to continue that policy.
MS (Nader/Moore) to reiterate the existing direction to staff which would be to pursue options for a
relocation facility.
Councilmen Moore felt the item should be discussed with the full Counc~.
Mayor Nader stated that he wanted to be sure that the Counc~'s general policy direction stood so that staff
would not be wasting their time, etc.
MOTION WITHDRAWN: (Nader)
d. Ratification of appointment: Maureen McNair - Resource Conservation Commission.
MSC 0Vioore/Nader) to approve the ratification of appointment of Maureen McNair to the Resource
Conservation Commission. Approved 3-0-2 with Horton and Malcolm absent.
21. COUNCIL COMMENTS - None
ADJOURNMENT
City Attorney Boogaard informed Council that there was no need to meet in Closed Session regarding
acquisition of property and requested that the items regarding pending litigation and potential litigation be
carried over to the meeting of 10/27/92.
Acquisition of Property pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 - 100 Woodlawn Avenue
(Richard A. Hall Company, owner).
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a) - Settlement of Otay Valley
Lawsuit - Siroonian vs. City of Chula Vista.
Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - City of Chula Vista vs. Otay
Municipal Water District.
ADJOURNMENT AT 9:35 P.M. to the joint meeting of the City Council/County Board of Supervisors on
Thursday, October 22, 1992 at 3:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, thence to the Regular City Council
Meeting on October 27, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.
A Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency commenced at 9:36 p.m. and adjourned at 9:43 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
BEVEtLLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk