HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1993/06/01 M/NITI'E~ OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ChqJLA VISTA
Tuesday, June 1, 1993 Council Chambers
4:00 p.m. Public Services Building
CALL TO ORDER
1. ROLL CALL:
PRESENT: Councilmembers Fox, Horton (arrived at 4:17 p.m.), Moore, Rindone, and
Mayor Nader (arrived at 4:17 p.m.)
ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Beverly
A. Authelet, City Clerk
2. PLRDGE OF AH.RGIANCE TO THE FLAG, SILENT PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MI~: April 13, 1993 (Special Joint Meeting of the Redevelopment
Agency/City Council), May lg, 1993 (Regular Meeting of the City Council).
MSC (Fox/Moore) to approve the minutes of April 13 and May 18, 1993 as presented. Approved 3-0-2 with
Horton and Nader absent.
4. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY:
a. Presentation by Congressman Bob Filner.
Congressman Filner updated Council on the following activities: 1) establishment of a local office at 333 "F~
Street; 2) commitment from the federal government for money for the treatment of Tijuana sewage by San
Diego's sewer system; 3) thanked the City for their forthright stance on the airport situation which continued
to be a political football and committed to work with the City; 4) seeking changes to the Clean Water Aet
to allow cost effective improvements to the system; 5) hopeful there would be monies for cities in a stimulus
package for jobs; and 6) passage by the House of the Presidenr's budget proposal which he hoped would put
the Country back on track. He then introduced Vincent Hall the District Director for the area. He informed
the public there would be a Town Hall meeting on Saturday, June 5th from 2:00 - 4:00 p.m. at the Library.
Councilmember Rindone stated he had, under his comments on the Agenda, the issue of a regional aL~port
at Miramar. He was not advocating the closure but if the base was closed he felt the City should support
it as a viable option.
Congressman Filner advised Council to focus on a process that involved the Navy rather than bringing up
the specific option of Miramar. He felt that galvanized certain opposition. He had always tried to get people
to focus on the process which said the Navy had 200,000 acres of land in San Diego and they would have
to further downsize over the next decade. The area did not want to lose their economic benefit or get in
the way of National Security but he believed they could downsize in a way that would give the region an
airport. The Navy should tell the region what that was through a working posture with everyone involved.
Miramar was an obvious option but there were others. Therefore, the cites and county would not be seen
as "kicking out" the Navy.
Mayor Nader questioned what Congressman Filner felt regarding the position where the City would make
the Navy aware that some of the individuals speaking against the closure of Miramar may be doing to for
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 2
)
other than National Security concerns; the Citys position was that the Navy should look exclusively at
National Security concerns not at local political concerns. If the Navy concluded that it was in the Nation's
interest to relocate Miramar, or that it could be done without sacrificing National Security the City felt they
should be aware that some of the same individuals against the closure of Miramar had drawn the conclusion
that San Diego needed to have a mega-airport in the region. The City could also convey they were interested
in working with them if it was consistent with their mission.
Congressman Filner stated it would not hurt but he was uncertain as to how meaningful input would be.
He felt most of the decisions had already been made although there was some activity going on for the
public. He did not want to raise any hopes that it would have a lot of meaning at this point. It was his
sense that the battle for Miramar would be during the next round of base closures.
b. Proclamation declaring June 3, 1993 as 'Law Enforcement Records and Support Personnd Day.'
The proclamation was presented by Mayor Pro Temp Rindone to Capt. Ross Withers. Representing the
department were: Mary Kay Arsenault, Latent Print Examiner; Elizabeth Gonzales, Business Office; Melissa
Trnlock, Community Service Officer; and Mary Lear, CIS Specialist.
c. Oath of Office: Ignacio Valdovinos - Aging Commission. Oath of Office was administered by City
Clerk Authelet.
d. Recognizing Evdyn Ferkovich, recently honored with the 1992 Civic Recognition Award, for devoting
more than 25 years to working with the elderly.
e. Proclamation recognizing the participants in the Chula Vista Adult Schoo]/Del Rey Center *Stop the
594' (Graf[iti) Art Contest, The proclamation was presented by Mayor Pro Tern Rindone to Tom Rodrigo,
Assistant Principal, Chula Vista Adult School/Del Rey Center.
Mayor Nader stated he had supported a mural program in the past which had been turned down by the
majority of the Council. He felt had been turned down due to costs of hiring an outside professional and
suggested that Mr. Rodrigo and students participating in the program contact staff members in the Police
Department and/or Parks and Recreation Department regarding such a program.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items pulled: 6)
S. W~I'I'I'EN COMMUNICATIONS: None submitted.
6. RESOLUTION 17132 APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1993-94
SPREAD OF ASSESSMENTS FOR EASTLAKE MAINTENANCE DIb-rRICT NUMBER ONE, DECLAP, ING THE
INTENI]ON TO ESTABliSH ZONE E FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF TR.I.RGRAPH CANYON CHANNEL AND
TO II'v'Y AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS AND SETlING JULY 13, 1993 AND JULY 20, 1993 AT 6:00 P.M.
AS THE DATES AND TIMES FOR THE PUBliC HEARINGS - On 3/2/93, Counc~ directed the City Engineer
to prepare and file reports of assessments for all existing City Open Space Maintenance Districts. The report
for EastLake Maintenance District Number One has been prepared and the resolution approves the report
and sets the dates for public hearings to consider the spreading of assessments. All other reports were
considered by separate action on the 5/25/93 agenda. The resolution also approves establishing Zone E to
provide for the maintenance of Telegraph Canyon Channel Phase One. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Public Works and Director of Parks and Recreation) Pulled from the Consent
Calendar.
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 3
Councilmember Rindone stated there had been a similar issue before Council regarding the name change
of a road and he wanted to be sure Councilmembers wanted to assess residents for the cost of the
naturalized channels. Saying it was not a City responsibility but placing it in various assessment districts
would be a change in past policy. He did not feel the proposal was correct and that it was a City
responsibility. Action by Council now could save the notification of homeomen in the affected districts,
cost of notification, and future public hearings.
Mayor Nader stated he tended to agree with Councilmember Rindone but wanted to hear staffs perspective.
He was concerned that the boundaries of the proposed district appeared to include the EastLake Business
Park. The Business Park was intended to be a focal point of attracting high-tech and bio-tech industries to
the City and he was concerned with anything that would drive up the cost of bringing them to the City.
Staff had informed him that growth in the City was paying for itself and ff that was the case he questioned
why a special assessment district was needed. He questioned whether the revenues from the eastern growth
were inadequate to do what Councilmember Rindone suggested.
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, responded that one of the problems was that the only real source of
funds for maintaining drainage facilities, that were not within a street, was the general fund. Up until
approximately ten years ago the City required the construction of concrete channels which were more
expensive to construct but less expensive to maintain. The open space maintenance district code had been
changed to allow maintenance of natural drainage areas.
Mayor Nader stated it was his understanding that Zone E was proposed to be a new open space assessment
district.
Mr. Lippitt stated it was already in a maintenance district but was not being charged for drainage because
everything within current EastLake was improved with concrete standards. The proposal was for a portion
of Telegraph Canyon channel that was westerly of EastLake. It was a naturalized portion of the channel and
the City would assessing the area within the drainage basis.
Mayor Nader questioned whether Zone E was an open space maintenance district or if was it part of a larger
open space maintenance district.
Mr. Lippitt stated it was part of a larger open space maintenance district. It would be a separate zone.
Mayor Nader felt such a district was more fair if formed and assessed prior to the time the homes were
occupied. Therefore, buyers would be notified of the assessments prior to their purchase. It appeared,
looking at the boundaries of the zone, that the residences included were in areas of EastLake Greens that
were already built.
Mr. Lippitt responded that was correct. The City would be imposing an additional assessment on the
homeowners in the area.
Councilmember Rindone stated the charge the first five years was minimal but then it had a large increase.
He felt it was a major policy decision, i.e. adding a new assessment on homes that were already bu~t and
occupied.
Mayor Nader expressed concern that there would be an impact on the general fund. If development was
not paying its own way the Council needed to revisit the calculation for the fiscal impact of the development
to begin with.
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 4
Councilmember Moore stated he shared Councilmember Rindone's concerns. He did not feel it was correct
to add an assessment after the homes had been built and occupied.
MS (Kindone/Moore) to Me the item.
Mr. Lippitt stated the action was not only for the maintenance of the drainage channel but also the open
space and medians which the homeowners had been paying for. It was the annual assessment update for
the rest of the area which had been established prior to the construction of the homes. He recommended
Council go forward with the hearing.
AMENDIVIENT TO MOTION: (Rjndone/lVloore) to approve Resolution 17132 with the ddetion of Zone E,
which would be filed.
City Attorney Boogaard stated the proposed resolution approved the Engineers Report which contained a
report for Zone E. He questioned whether the Engineer's Report could stand on its own with the deletion
of Zone E.
1Vw. Lippitt responded that it could, Zone E was an additional assessment that would be placed on certain
parcels. He stated the agreement, toward the end of the report, with EastLake was that the City would use
its best efforts to create an assessment district to maintain it. He did not believe EastLake would have a
problem with it if the City maintained it through the general fund. He questioned whether it was the policy
of the Council that the drainage channel maintenance be included as long as potential buyers were notified
prior to purchasing their homes that they were in a maintenance district; or was it Council's intent that all
drainage ways would be maintained by the general fund.
Mayor Nader felt Council's intent was that if assessment districts were needed they be formed prior to the
time people purchased their homes and moved in. He was concerned regarding the potential impact upon
the general fund and would support the motion with reservations. The City needed to anticipate much
sooner whether an assessment district would be desirable and have it formed prior to the time people moved
in.
City Attorney Boogaard referred to page 5 of the EastLake agreement wherein the "City became obligated
to use its best efforts ...." and questioned whether that was the language Mr. Lippitt had refereed to.
Mr. Lippitt responded that was correct.
City Attorney Boogaard questioned how much of Zone E was occupied by residential homeowners.
Mr. Lippitt responded that part of Zone E was the Telegraph Canyon development which included 300 units
just westerly of EastLake which was not developed but they were required to participate. Salt Creek also
drained into it and they were required by Council to have a district to pay for it. Most of the EastLake
residential areas were 80-90% developed.
City Attorney Boogaard questioned whether property owners in Zone E had been made aware there would
be a channel maintenance assessment district.
Mr. Lippitt responded they were told they were in an open space maintenance district but every
improvement they were required to maintain was not given.
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 5
City Attorney Boogaard felt that at a minimum, best effort would require the scheduling of a hearing to
deliberate in good faith at that hearing and not in the present format. He requested an additional two weeks
to work with staff to decide the City's obligations and meet with EastLake.
Mr. Lippitt stated the hearing had to be held by July 13th and staff needed enough time to notice the
property owners.
Councilmember Moore did not feel he could support the addition of another fee if the property owners had
been notified of their assessments prior to the purchase of their homes. Assessments needed to be placed
before the properties were sold.
Mayor Nader stated that after reviewing the agreement with EastLake there was other language on page 6-22
regarding the City's intention "to use the principal received from EastLake as a trust fund using interest
earnings to cover the yearly maintenance costs of each completed portion of the channel~. It also had other
language, page 6-24, which stated "including within the channel maintenance district in cooperation with
the County of San Diego all property within the drainage basin within the jurisdiction of the County ...., and
other language from which he felt the intent was that the City would use the interest from monies deposited
by the developer to pay for maintenance of the channel. He felt the City was to take a deposit from the
developer five years ago, use the interest that would accrue beginning in year six for the areas fair share of
maintenance of the channel and beginning five years ago, pursue the County formation of a basin wide
maintenance district to cover drainage of the entire basin.
City Attorney Boogaard stated he had not had the opportunity to review the agreement.
Mayor Nader felt those clauses put a different light on whether the City had a legal obligation or whether
it was appropriate for Council to move forward. He questioned whether EastLake deposited a sum of money
as referenced in the agreement five years ago.
Mr. Lippin responded that EastLake had the responsibility of maintaining Phase I of the channel which was
the portion under consideration. Phase II was the portion the City built, and Phase III was the portion west
of the western end. EastLake had been maintaining that section of the channel and a section further down
stream since it was constructed.
City Manager Goss questioned whether there was any interest that was accrued that would help to pay for
future maintenance after the five year period.
Mr. Lippitt responded he was uncertain as to whether or not EastLake had given the City money to put in
the bank that would accrue interest.
Mayor Nader requested that staff look into the issue and if EastLake had not provided that fund, which
should be drawing interest, and report back to Council. If they had provided the fund staff was to report
back to where it stood and how it was disposed of. He requested the City Attorney, at his leisure, analyze
the agreement included in the staff report and advise Council on the legal ramifications.
City Manager Goss felt the intent was that there be developer responsibility to maintain the channel for five
years and then it was contemplated that some type of assessment district would be formed to maintain it.
That was in exchange for the fact that it would not be a concrete lined channel. Staff needed to review the
agreement and report back to Council. Council may also want to look at the policy as to whether the City
would use concrete lined channels,
Minutes
Jane 1, 1993
Page 6
Mayor Nader did not feel any of the Councilmembers wanted to go back to concrete lined channels. They
were saying that if assessment districts needed to be formed to maintain natural channels they should be
formed prior to the time the homes were purchased.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: OSlader) agreed to by Maker and Second of Motion - referral to staff with a
report to Council on a review of the maintenance agreement with EastLake, particularly pertaining to the
City's obligation to form an assessment district and the u-ust fund to be provided by EastLake.
Councilmember Rindone stated it was also the intent that the report include the number of dwelling units
currently occupied.
City Attorney Boogaard questioned whether Council was proposing that a new Zone E be created consisting
of non-occupied or non-improved areas.
Mayor Nader felt staff may want to consider that option to put before Council for consideration.
Councilmember Rindone stated the motion on the floor did not include that but it would not be
inappropriate to bring that to Council for their consideration.
Mayor Nader questioned whether the home owner knew there was a potential that their assessment could
go over and beyond what other homes in the same open space district would see as an increase.
Mr. Lippitt doubted they had been so notified.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously.
7. REPORT ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
CALIFORNIA GNATCATCHER AS A THREATENED SPECIES - On 3/25/93, the California Gnatcatcher was
listed by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior as "threatened" under the Federal Endangered Species Act. Until
an interim conservation process is adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California
Depa~hxxent of Fish and Game in the next several months, no "take" (harm, harassment or disturbance) of
the species or occupied coastal sage scrub habitat is permitted unless the applicant obtains the necessary
Federal permits or approvals. The administrative procedures will provide consistent review of projects within
the City. Staff recommends Council accept the report. (Director of Planning)
City Manager Goss informed Council that staff requested the item be pulled from the agenda.
8. REPORT CHANGES TO CHULA VISTA TRANSIT (CV13 ROUTF~ 706A AND 712 -The
proposed changes to CVT Routes 706A and 712 would expand the service area of each route. Staff
recommends Council accept the report and approve the changes effective 7/1/93. (Director of Public Works)
Councilmember Rindone stated he was concerned there was no way to use Chula Vista Transit on Fourth
Avenue going south. He was not sure that was something the City wanted to perpetuate for the long run.
MSUC CNader/Horton) to approve the report and staff recommendations.
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 7
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
9. PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-91-24; APPEAL OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVAL OF REQUEST TO REDEVELOP SERVICE STATION AND ADD MINI-MARKET AND
CAR WASH AT 1498 ME.I.ROSE AVENUE - The proposal was approved by the Planning Commission in
January 1992 and consequently appealed by Council in response to concerns with traffic impacts and an
over-concentration of alcohol sales facilities. Consideration of the appeal has been postponed to coincide
with reconsideration of the alcohol sales issue, Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of
Planning) Continued from the meefing of S/25/93.
RESOLUTION 17133 AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION kND
THEREBY APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-91-24 TO REDEVELOP A
SERVICE STATION AND ADD A MINI-MARKET AND CAR WASH AT 1498 MELROSE AVENUE
Mayor Nader stated Items 9 and 10 would be heard coneinTently.
Steve Griffin, Senior Planner, gave a brief history of the project and reviewed the staff report. The Zoning
Administrator had placed the following conditions on the pennit: 1) no video games; 2) an exterior lighting
plan; 3) no advertising of beer and wine; 4) strict limitation as to the areas devoted to alcohol sales; S) the
payphone would not be capable of accepting incoming calls; 6) provision that would allow the phone or
promotional displays to be removed at the sole discretion of the Zoning Administrator, in consultation with
the Police Department if problems arose; and 7) review of the permit in one year by the Police Department
and Planning Deparnnent. The approval had been separated so Council could approve the mini-market
without having to approve alcohol sales. Resolution 17133 would authorize the conditional use permit for
the mini-market and car wash.
Councilmember Hotton questioned the percentage of reclaimed water used in the car wash.
Mr. Griffin stated the condition required that 80% of the water be reclaimed. He had been told that was
achievable but anything beyond that was not achievable by modern technology.
Councilmember Fox stated that at the time he appealed the decision, his argument was that if character and
image of the neighborhood was considered there was an over-concentration.
Mr. Griffin stated Council could choose to make that finding. The discussion regarding ten facilities
representing an over-concentration was the State standard.
Councilmember Moore expressed concern regarding damage to the asphalt due to water from the car wash.
He did not see any corrective action in the report, i.e. concrete in the runways for exiting the carwash.
Mr. Griffin responded that particular provision was not required. The facility would use a blower system
for drying which was more effective in removing the water. Condition #2 obligated the applicant or any
successors to repair any water damage if it did occur.
Mayor Nader referred to Condition #7 and questioned whether the removal of the phone referred to any
criminal activity, not just loitering. He also questioned whether the discretion to remove the pay phone
could be given directly to the Police Deparm~ent as they would be in the best position to ascertain the
problem.
Mr. Griffin stated Planning would not object to such an amendment to the condition.
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 8
)
Mayor Nader referred to Condition #9 and stated the language seemed construable as preventing the City
from imposing any significant restriction on alcohol sales as it would be a loss of revenue the permittee
would not be expected to cover in the normal operation of business.
City Attorney Boogaard stated the Planning Department was adding Condition #9 to all CUP's and it acted
independently of Condition #8 which allowed review in one year solely on the basis of alcohol beverage
sales and allowed right of review independent of Condition #9. After that review it allowed modifications
or revocation for violations of Condition #8.
Mayor Nader questioned whether it was the City Attorney's opinion that if Condition #8 was invoked, there
could not be an argument made under Condition #9 that would lead to litigation or other difficulties.
City Attorney Boogaard recommended adding the words "not withstanding the provisions of Condition
to Condition #8.
Mayor Nader questioned whether Council was required to make a finding that the proposed use was
necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which contributed to the well being of the
neighborhood or the community.
City Attorney Boogaard stated the Mayor was correct.
Mayor Nader questioned if that was the only basis staff had for finding the proposed use was necessary, i.e.
that the sale of beer or wine was considered a desirable convenience for the surrounding areas.
Mr. Griffin responded that was the finding.
Councilmember Horton questioned what areas of the City had the 120% crime rate which was commonly
used to identify high crime areas.
Lieutenant Wilson responded it was a difficult question when using the formula used by Alcoholic Beverage
Control. There were ten reporting districts within the City and they took the overall projected crime per year
and inserted it into their formula at the 100% level. Reported crimes included auto theft, rape, murder,
robbery, aggravated assault, and larceny. If it was 120% or more it was considered excessive and a protest
could be made based on that. He did not have the information designating those areas at the meeting. The
ABC would take a protest if there was an aggravating police problem at the location.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
· Palrick Fiedler, 2322 West Third Street, Los Angeles, CA, Project Engineer, Fred Fiedler & Associates,
stated the overall design was state of the art. They had worked with staff over the past two years to develop
the landscaping treatment and driveway location. The orientation of the pump islands and building was
designed to make gasoline the main focus. Lighting was very important to them as their studies showed that
customers would come back to a well lit facility. The lack of video games and sidewalks around the building
was deliberate in an effort to reduce loitering. Texaco had a policy to use concrete for the entire site of car
washes. The use of reclaimed water reduced the water per wash to approximately five gallons versus
twenty-five to forty gallons of water used if a car was washed at home.
· Ralph Saltsman, 426 Cnlver Blvd., Play del Rey, CA, Attorney representing Texaco, stated he wanted
to address the issuance of a beer and wine conditional use permit. Texaco could live without floor displays
and would find that condition acceptable. With respect to the issue of over-concentration, he referred to
Municipal Code Section 19.14.030 which stated over-concenn'ation was the issue in which the Zoning
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 9
Administrator could make a determination upon issuance or denial of the CUP. That issue was the focal
point of the determination made by the City earlier and the staff report dwelled extensively on that issue
and its various ramifications. He then reviewed the definition of over-concentration. He stated the impact
of the fac~ity on traffic and traffic flow, as stated in the report, would not be a significant impact. It was
their experience that the facility was not a destination point but a location along the way. The police
department stated it was not a high crime area. Under Criteria #2 and part of Criteria #3 there was no
over-concentration under Rule 61.3 and the service station would be providing a new service to the area.
Texaco wanted to bu~d the fac~ity and he had been told it was a package deal in that each and every
component, i.e. car wash, food, gasoline, beer and wine sales, all formed the necessary formula to make the
project economically viable. He felt the terms of the ordinance could affirmatively be met by the staff report
and Council's findings had been met.
Mayor Nader stated the ordinance required that not only the Zoning Administrator and Council, in reviewing
the Zoning Administrator's decision, find that there was no over-concentration but also that based on
substantial evidence that all facts required by Section 19.14.080 existed. He questioned whether that
referred to the findings that had to be made if the resolution were to be adopted.
City Attorney Boogaard responded Section 19.14.080 was the section that required the four findings on pages
10-8 and 10-9. The over-concentration provision was not included.
· Dave Mattson, 9966 San Diego Mission Road, San Diego, CA, representing Texaco, gave a brief
history of the project. He stated Texaco realized the right to sell beer and wine was a privilege. They had
an ongoing training program in San Diego and their people were brought in every ninety days for training
on alcoholic beverage sales. Anyone purchasing an alcoholic beverage in their facility had to show an ID,
no matter what their age. The nearest car wash to the facility was the Shell Station at 1-805 and Main Street
and there was a self-serve Texaco car wash on Third and Palomar.
Councilmember Fox questioned whether the prohibition of beer and wine sales would impact Texaco's
decision to develop the facility.
Mr. Mattson responded that investment funds were extremely limited within his company and the petroleum
industry and opportunities were very great. They would take the project that made the most economic
sense. Mr. Saltzman had indicated that Texaco would give up floor displays and he would recommend to
management they give up the ability to have floor displays. However, he felt it would be adequately covered
in the one year overview of the CUP, if granted. If Texaco found it to be a problem it would be in their
interest not to have floor displays.
Councilmember Moore questioned the stacking distance on Orange going east at the light at Melrose.
Mr. Griffin stated it was a right in and right out only.
Hal Rosenberg, Traffic Engineer, stated there would be a dedication on Orange and a partial widening on
Melrose.
Councilmember Rindone stated it was a difficult decision and questioned whether Texaco would proceed
if Council conditioned the CUP with a one year review.
Mr. Mattson responded that Texaco would probably proceed based on their ability to control that portion
of their business.
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 10
· Crystal Sanders, 1517 Melrose, Chula Vista, CA, spoke in opposition to the staff recommendation.
She felt the facility would create higher traffic and lower property values. The area would also have
increased traffic due to the Olympic Training Center and the library. There was a large concentration of
children in the area and she expressed concern regarding their safety. The existing bus stops were also a
concem regarding accidents. She requested that Council review the crime rate in the area which she felt
was extremely high.
· Faith E. Willjams, 257 Sandstone Street, Chula Vista, CA, spoke in opposition to the staff report and
stated she did not feel crime should be the only criteria and recommended that noise be considered. Since
the shopping center had been remodeled, noise had increased in the area 100°/9. She urged Council to reject
the proposal.
· Veronica Eberle, 1505 Marble Way, Chula Vista, CA, spoke in opposition of the staff report and
stated there was an elementary school two blocks away and the children had to cross the street. She
expressed concern regarding the additional traffic that would be generated and noted the traffic counts in
the report had been taken before the Lucky's had moved into the area. There were already four facilities
selling alcohol which she felt was sufficient. She was not opposed to the mini-man or car wash. She
presented Council with a petition signed by fifty residents and businesses in the area.
Mayor Nader questioned whether there was a trend in crime for the neighborhood.
Ms. Ebe~e responded there were more kids hanging out and drinking in the cul-de-sacs. Loitering had been
a large problem in the past and she felt it was again happening.
· Jonie Gypto, 362 Tourmaline Court, Chula Vista, CA, spoke against the staff report. She felt crime
had increased in the area and was against the sale of beer and wine.
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed.
Councilmember Horton felt the car wash and mini-mart were desirable but was opposed to the sale of
alcohol. The staff report stated the existing facilities were hang-outs for youth and it was a common practice
for alcohol to be purchased for them at two of the locations.
RESOLUTION 17133 OFHS. RED BY COUNCILMEMBER HORTON. reading of the text was waived. Staff was
directed to return within two weeks with a resolution which set forth findings that would reasonably support
a decision to reject the CUP for PCC-93-10 for alcohol sales and continue the public hearing to 6/15/93.
Referral to staff was seconded by Councilmember Fox,
Councilmember Fox stated he would support the motion. He felt it was common practice for liquor to be
sold to minors in the area. He could not justify that the facility would enhance the neighborhood as he felt
there was an over concentration. He expressed concern over the amount of time the process had taken.
Councilmember Moore stated the CUP must be for the overall good of the neighborhood and he did not feel
there was a demand for a mini-man or sale of alcoholic beverages. He also felt there was a traffic problem
in the area.
Mayor Nader stated no member of the neighborhood or community had come forward in support of the
facility and he could not find evidence to support Finding #1. He would support the motion and
commended the residents on their involvement and participation in the Neighborhood Crime Watch program.
He shared Counc~member Fox's concern regarding the amount of time taken to process the request.
Councilmember Rindone stated the proposed project was beneficial to the community and neighborhood as
it was a significant upgrade in the appearance of the property and would provide new services to the
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 11
community. He did not feel anyone on the Council was advocating increasing the number of locations for
the sale of alcoholic beverages.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-1 with Moore opposed.
MS (Rindone/Nader) to refer to staff for a report back in 30 - 45 days with recommendalions on what could
be done to deal with concerns expressed at the public hearing for operators of premises that currently had
the right to dispense alcoholic beverages.
Mayor Nader questioned whether it was the intent of the motion that the Police Department be directed to
look at the problem in association with existing alcohol outlets exclusively or in any particular higher
priority over other problems identified.
Councilmember Rindone stated Council had heard concerns regarding loitering, beer running, youth
congregating in parking lots, etc. and he wanted a staff referral to examine the situation and return with
recommendations if the concerns were validated.
Mayor Nader stated he could support the motion if staff looked at the referral in the context of the 'big
picture".
Councilmember Rindone stated that was understood.
VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously.
10. PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-93-10; APPEAL OF ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR APPROVAL OF REQUEST TO SELl. ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AT PROPOSED MINI-
MARKET AT 1498 MRI.ROSE AVENUE IN C-N ZONE - In January 1992, the Zoning Administrator
conditionally approved a request to sell beer and wine at the proposed Texaco mini-market at 1498 Melrose
Avenue in the C-N zone. The request was proposed under the City's recently adopted Conditional Use Permit
(CUP) procedure for alcohol sales in the C-N zone. The decision has been appealed and has been scheduled
to coincide with the appeal of the CUP for the mini-market/car wash. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Manning) Continued from the meeting of 5/25/93.
RESOLLrFION 17134 AF~RMING THE DECISION OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND
THEREBY APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-93-10 FOR BEER AND WINE
SAI.Kq AT 1498 MRI.ROSE AVENUE
The public hearing was heard concurrently with Item 9.
11. PUBLIC ~NG PCC-93-29;CONSIDERATIONOFACONDITIONALUSEPERMITTOALLOW
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC LIBRARY FACILITY AT THE SOLrFHEAST CORNER OF ORANGE AND
FOURTH AVENUES - CITY INITIATED - The City is requesting approval to build a 37,000 square foot library
facility and potential facility expansion plan. The project is located on six acres at the southeast corner of
Fourth and Orange Avenues in the R-2-P zone district. The proposal includes a literacy center, a 100-seat
multipurpose conference room, a collection of 178,000 books for children, young adults and adults, and
other library amenities designed to serve the bilingual, bicultural Montgomery Community. A parking area
with a capacity for 175 vehicles and reserved area for an additional SO spaces will serve the proposed
facility. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning)
RESOLDTION 17135 GRANTINGACONDITIONALUSEPERMITTOBUILDALIBRARYFACILITY
AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ORANGE AND FOURTH AVENUES
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.
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 12
)
RESOLUTION 1713S OFFII-RED BY COUNCILME1VIBER FOX, reading of the text was waived.
Councilmember Rindone questioned the plan to resolve the $59S,000 short fall funding necessary for the
consn-uction of the library.
David Palmer, Acting Library Director, responded the shortfall was spread out over two fiscal years. The
total cost for the project was $15,445,000 which included land acquisition, architectural and engineering
fees, construction, site development, furnishings and equipment, and Foundation Book Collection. The City
had the entire funding for the project except for $S94,000 which would be toward the very end of the
project and would be used for the Foundation Book Collection. Staff intended to evaluate the Opening Day
Collection in terms of the number of volumes they could move into the facility from the Castle Park Library
which could lower the dollar amount needed for the Opening Day Book Collection or the Foundation Book
Collection. Staff expected to seek alternative funding for that shortfall, i.e. the development of a Library
Foundation and a "Buy-A-Book" campaign. The shortfall was out of a project book collection of $3,000,000
and was therefore a small amount of money.
Councilmember Rindone stated he strongly endorsed the project but was uncomfortable authorizmg a
presumed $600,000 shortfall when the City had all the other funding.
City Manager Goss responded that the CUP was before Council. The only reason the fiscal impact was listed
was because it was Council's policy. Council was not being asked to approve the funding and should be
assured there was funding for the land acquisition, construction, furnishings, and books. The CIP projects
were fluid in the sense that unlike the operating budget where it was adopted a year in advance, a lot of
the capital projects required staff to keep working on the funding over several years. He did not see any
reason that the expenditure side could not be cut back to balance with the revenues. The CIP budget could
be modified in the future if necessary.
Councilmember Rindone stated it was an admirable goal but he did not want it misstated that there was
a $600,000 shotflail.
Councilmember Moore felt staff had done what Council had requested regarding the fiscal impact. It was
good that it was brought to Council's attention but he felt it should have been written as a shotflail for
books.
VOTE ON MOTION: apprnved unanimously.
ORAL COM/dUNICATIONS
· Israel Acosta, 102 E1 Capitan Drive, Chula Vista, CA, referred to his legal problems with
Southwestern College and felt his rights had been violated as he had not been given due process.
Mayor Nader stated it was his understanding that Mr. Acosta's concerns were with Southwestern College.
While it was located in the City of Chula Vista, the City did not have authority over their disciplinary
procedures. They were an independently elected Board of Trustees.
· Joseph W. Garcia, 484 Fifth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, questioned whether staff reports became a part
of an ordinance or resolution when adopted by Council.
City Attorney Boogaard stated it had to be evaluated on a case by case basis. Unless he had a specific
resolution or staff report to refer to he could not answer the question in general.
Counc~member Moore stated the Council did not vote on conservation but on a resolution or ordinance.
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page l3
Mr. Garcia stated he had sent a letter to the City Attorney regarding the sewer taxation and questioned when
he would receive a response. His concern was not only the GIS system but using sewer taxation funds for
non-sewer related expenses from that fund for City operations.
City Attorney Boogaard stated the item was under evaluation. Staff would be reporting back to Council.
Mayor Nader requested the information before monies were expended from the fund.
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, stated staff would return to Council before the end of the fiscal year.
* * * * * * Council recessed at 6:43 p.m. and reconvened at 7:18 p.m. * * * * * *
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS
None submitted.
ACTION ITEMS
None submitted.
ITEMS pUIJ.Rr} FROM THE CONSENT CAI.RNDAR
Item pulled: 6. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order.
OTHER BUSINESS
12. ta'rY MANAGER'S REPORT(S}
a. Scheduling of meetings. City Manger Goss stated the following meetings were scheduled: 1) 6/2/93
at 3:00 p.m. with the County Board of Supervisor for Otay Ranch; 2) and proposed Otay Ranch meetings
on 6/30/93, 7/12/93, 7/21/93, 7/22/93, and 7/26/93 from 3:00 - 6:00 p.m. There was a conflict with the
Council's schedule regarding the proposed meeting on 6/16/93.
Mayor Nader stated if there was no objection from Council, meetings would be scheduled for 6/2/93,
6/30/93, 7/12/93, 7/21/93, 7/22/93, and 7/26/93. It was his understanding that action would be required
by Council at meetings held after the overview given on 6/2/93.
George Krempl, Deputy City Manager, responded that staff and Planning Commission recommendations
would be reviewed and public testimony would be taken before action by Council.
Councilmember Fox questioned whether public testimony would be taken on 6/30/93 and if so, he requested
the meeting be held in Chula Vista.
City Manager Goss responded the City and County would be altemating sites. He would see if the location
for the 6/30/93 meeting could be reversed. He felt Council should talk to the Board. The Board and
Council had agreed on all the dates except 7/12/93.
MS (Moore/Nader) Council approve the following dates for joint meetings with the County Board of
Supervisors on the Otay Ranch: 6/30/93, 7/12/93, 7/21/93, 7/22,/93, and 7/26/93.
AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Moore,rNader) the meetings will not necessarily be every other but equally
divided between the County and the City. Staff is to work out the locations.
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 14
VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: approved unanimously.
City Manager Goss reminded Council there was a budget worksession/meeting on 6/3/93 at 6:00 p.m.,
budget worksession/meeting and CIP tour on Saturday with a joint meeting with the Parks and Recreation
Commission at 8:00 a.m. prior to the tour.
MSC (Rindone/Moore) to approve 6/16/93 as a date for a joint meeting wifl~ the City and Board of
Superr/soPs on the 0tay Ranch. Approved 3-2 with Hotton and Nader opposed.
13. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
a. Ratification of appointment: Gonzalo Lopez - EnvironmenraI Commerce Zone Task Force; and Marie
Miehls - Child Care Commission (Continued from the meeting of 5/25/93).
MSUC (Nader/Fox) to approve the ratification of appointment of Gonzalo Lopez to the Environmental
Commerce Zone Task Force and Marie Miehls to the Child Care Commission.
b. Mayor Nader stated the Solid Waste Management District (SAD) met last Friday regarding the Otay
Valley Reclamation Plant. The existing plans approved by the City of San Diego did not include water
reclamation facilities in the southbay until well into the next century which was of concern to the City and
the southbay. A technical advisory committee had been working on the issue and their report was approved
by the District Board which included a recommendation to build an initial 2,000,000 gallon a day
reclamation plant at Otay, exploring options to tie into the IBWC ouffall, and directing further discussion.
14. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Rindone
· Regional airport at Miramar Naval Air Station. Discussion was held under Item 4a, presentation by
Congressman Filner.
Councilmember Rindone felt Council needed to continue to explore the option of Miramar as a site for a
regional airport.
Mayor Nader felt it would be advisable, in light of San Diego City Council action, for the City to provide a
letter to the Commission which would make them aware that there were some protesting the closure of
Miramar, not because it was in the interest of National Security but because they had concluded San Diego
needed a new major regional airport and wanted to place the airport on the border. The City would be
supportive of any action the Commission took that would accomplish military downsizing in a way most
compatible with National Security. If they concluded that it was compatible with National Security to close
Miramar, they should be aware that SANDAG had identified Miramar as a potential location for a new major
regional airport, should one be needed. The City would anticipate that the Commission would find most
of the leaders in the area cooperative with them in accomplishing a transition to civilian use.
MSUC (Rindone/Fox) to direct staff to prepare a letter as described by the Mayor, for his signature. Also
to be included should be consideration of the usage of the current international airport at Lindberg Fidd
and investigate the demographic area of those utiliz/ng that airport.
Mayor Nader felt it should also be included that the border site was possibly illegal under the federal and
state Clean Air Acts.
· Inconsistencies with Council approval of the allocation of Community Development Block Grant
monies. Continued to the 6/18/93 meeting.
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 15
· Councilmember Rindone stated there were thirty-three board/commission vacancies. He urged
anyone interested in volunteering their time to submit an application.
Mayor Nader requested that staff include information regarding vacancies when the meetings were televised.
Councilmember Fox
· Councilmember Fox referred to information presented to Counc~ regarding attendance of an
appointed Commissioner and stated he did not feel such a situation would happen again as Council had
clarified the policy. Under the policy, any commissioner missing 25% or more of the meetings would be
notified by the Chair or secretary of the commission and could be removed prior to July.
City Attorney Boogaard stated his interpretation of the policy was that the automatic vacancy nile only
operated in July of each year. There was also the three meeting rule in which a commissioner would
automatically be removed as per the Charter. The automatic twenty-five percent rule only applied when the
log was created in July and the City Clerk, without further certification by the Council, would deem that
position vacant and post as per the Maddy Act. The notice right, as a commissioner approached the twenty-
five percent, was not contingent upon the automatic termination provision. If the notice was not sent, it
did not interfere with the automatic termination rule. It was a statement of good faith effort that the
secretary would try to give them notice of the absence problem.
Councilmember Hotcon
· Councilmember Horton stated it was her understanding that in the eastern territories it was a
requirement to have the dual piping and questioned whether that also included the infill projects in the older
parts of Chula Vista.
City Manager Goss responded that it did not include infill projects.
Mayor Nader questioned whether there were portions of the City, no matter what the nature of the
development where dual piping would not be required under the ordinance.
John Lippitt, Director of Public Works, responded that past practice had been that the City did not require
dual piping for infill projects on a block where there was no reclaimed water near. If there was a possibility
of having a source nearby he felt it could be required.
Mayor Nader questioned whether the ordinance gave staff that authority.
City Manager Goss felt it would be subject to Council approval on a subdivision map.
Mayor Nader requested that staff provide a very brief summary of what was and was not required under the
ordinance.
ADJOLIRNMENT
The City Council recessed at 8:28 p.m. and reconvened at 8:38 p.m. in a closed session to discuss:
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - EPA vs. the City of San Diego,
Chula Vista amicus party discussion, insu'uctions to attorneys. Continued from the meeting of
5/25/93.
Instructions to negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 - Chula Vista Employees
Association (CVEA), Western Council of Engineers CVVCE), Police Officers Association
International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Executive Management, Mid-Management, and
Unrepresented. Continued from the meeting of 5/25/93.
Minutes
June 1, 1993
Page 16
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Institution of litigation against
County of San Diego regarding Daley Rock Quarry CUP.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - [gou vs. the City of Chula Vista.
ADJOURNMENT AT 9:10 P.M. to a Joint Meeting of the City Council/County Board of Supervisors on
Wednesday, June 2, 1993 at 3:00 p.m. at the County Administration Center, thence to a Council Budget
Session on Thursday, June 3, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, thence to a Council CIP Tour
on Saturday, June 5, 1993 preceded by a Joint Meeting with the Parks and Recreation Commission at 8:00
a.m., and thence to the Regular City Council Meeting on June 8, 1993 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers.
A Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency convened at 8:29 p.m. and adjourned at 8:37 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk
Vicki C. Soderquist, D~6ity Clerk