HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1992/01/21
MINlITES OF A REGill.AR MEETING OF TIiE
O'IY OF OIDLA VISTA
Tuesday, January 21, 1992 Council Chambers
6:10 p.m. Public Services Building
CALLED TO ORDER
1. CAll. TIiE ROU.:
PRESENT: Councilmembers Grasser Horton, Malcolm, Moore, Rindone, and Mayor
Nader
ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney; and Beverly
A. Authelet, City Clerk
2. PLEDGE OF Au.EGIANCE TO TIiE FlAG. SIl.ENf PRAYER
3. APPROVAL OF MINlITES: January 7,1992.
MSUC (Moore;Nader) to approve the minutes of January 7, 1992 as amended.
4. SPEOAL ORDERS OF TIiE DAY: None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items Pulled: Sa, 10 & 11)
BALANCE OF CONSENT CALENDAR OFFERED BY MAYOR NADER, reading of the ten was waived, passed
and approved unanimously.
5. WRlTfEN COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter requesting a refund for amounts paid for a conditional use permit and modification -
Skill Centers of America, Deborah M. Johnson, Executive Administrator, 4160 Cartagena Drive, San Diego,
CA 92115. It was recommended that this item be referred to staff and that a recommendation be brought
back to Council at a future date. It is recommended that this item be referred to staff and that a
recommendation be brought back to Council at a future meeting. Pulled from Consent Calendar.
MSUC (Nader/Malcolm) to refer item to staff to try to determine whether Skill Centers of America qualifies
under the City's policy as a nonprofit entity and if they do, grant the fee waiver administratively. Bring it
back to Council only if the applicant and staff are unable to resolve the issue.
b. Letter requesting continuation of the left turn lane from Third Avenue to Second Avenue
on "E' Street· Frances W. Guest, 149 Twin Oaks Circle, Chula Vista, CA 91910. Staff recommended that
this letter be considered along with agenda item 20.
___.__._OM____._._..________
Minutes
January21, 1992
Page 2
6. RESOLUTION 16468 AMENDING THE 1990-1991 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM AND ADOPTING A
LEGISLATIVE WORK PROGRAM FOR 1992 - Proposed amendments to the Legislative Program to reflect
issues and address concerns raised during the tirst half of the 1991-92 legislative session. In addition, a
work program has been added to guide staff and the legislative consultant. Staff recommends approval of
the resolution. (City Manager)
7. RESOLUTION 16469 APPROVINGAMENDMF_aVl~TOFISCALYEAR1990-1991THROUGH1992-
1993 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOLO WITH THE CHULA VISTA EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION
(CVEA) AND TO FISCAL YEAR 1991-1992 THROUGH 1992-1993 MOU WITH WESI~RN COUNCIL OF
ENGINF/j~ CWCE), AND AU'I~OR1ZING THE REPLACEMENT OF THREE JOHN HANCOCK HEALTH
INSURANCE PLANS WITH THREE HEALTH NET PLANS - Major increases in the cost of the City's three John
Hancock health insurance plans and negotiations between the City and representatives of the City's employee
associations have resulted in the recommendation to replace the three John Hancock plans with three Health
Net plans. This change is contingent upon ratification of amendments to the Citys multi-year MOU's with
CVEA and WCE. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (City Manager)
8. RESOLUTION 16470 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN DIEGO ABANDONED
VEHICI.R ABATEMF2CF SERVICE AUTHORITY - In October 1991, Council passed a resolution creating the
San Diego County Abandoned Vehicle Abatement (AVA) Service Authority. A majority of the Count3?s other
cities passed similar resolutions. This resolution approves an agreement between the City of Chula Vista and
the San Diego County AVA Service Authority. The agreement provides for reimbursement to the General
Fund for expenditures related to the City's existing abandoned vehicle abatement program. Such
reimbursements will be made pursuant to the AVA Service Authority's Program and Plan. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Chief of Police)
9. RESOLLrrlON 16471 ACCEPTING THE 1990-1991 GRANTEE PERFORMANCE REPORT AND
AUTHORIZING ITS SUBMITTAL TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT - The City annually submits a Grantee Performance Report (GPR) to the U.S. Dept. of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The GPR provides detailed information on the use of Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds including the progress achieved and the status of funds. HUD
reviews the GPR and evaluates whether the City has carried out its activities in accordance with the City~s
1990-93 Community Development Plan and federal requirements. Staff recommends approval of the
resolution. (Director of Community Development)
10. RESOLUTION 16472 APPROVING CONTRACT AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR SERVIf.~R_~ OF
MARYANN MII.I.I~R FOR REPLACEMENT TIME OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR DURING
CONTINUED PROCESSING OF OTAY RANCH PROJECT, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE
SAID AGRERMF2,,rT - Contract for provision of Environmental Consulting Services by Maryann Miller for an
additional six months with a three month extension and appropriation of funds. Staff recommends approval
of the resolution. (Director of Planning) 4/Sth's vote required. Pulled from Consent Calendar.
Councilman Rindone stated there was an interest in reduction of utilization of consultants and yet this item
and item 11 both dealt with consultants. What concerned him was the use of consultants to backfill City
positions and stated that the positions needed to be filled by staff rates not consultant rates.
Councilman Malcolm said the consultant was needed but only for an additional six months.
Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 3
Councilwoman Grasser Horton asked if after June 1992 the consultant's services would still be needed for
other projects within the City.
Bob Leiter, Director of Planning, stated it was staffs intent to make a request to meet their penanent needs
for environmental staffing in the following year's budget proposal.
Councilwoman Grasser Hotton stated she would not approve the increased rate in the current economic
time.
MSC (Grasser Horton/Nader) to reduce compensation fTom $50 to ,$45 per hour. Approved 4-1 with
Councilman Rindone opposed.
RESOLL1TION 16472 AS AMF2qDED WAS OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, reading of the text was
waived, passed and approved 4-1 with Councilman Rindone opposed.
11. RESOLUTION 16473 APPROVING ~SION OF CONTRACT FOR PLANNING SERVICES FOR
WILH&M F. HEITER FOR THE CI'P/'S SIGN ABATEMENT PROGRAM AND APPROPRIATING NECESSARY
FUNDS THEREFOI~ - Mr. Heiter's original contract and previous extensions have been based on the
Department's best estimate to complete the City's Sign Abatement Program. With 245 of 281 sites within
Chula Vista proper and 39 of 107 illegal sites in Montgomery now abated, we are confident that one final
3-month extension will allow the Depat hnent to complete the project except for possible legal follow-up.
Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning] 4/Sth's vote required. Pulled from
Consent Calendar.
Mayor Nader stated he had a concern in renewing a consultant's contract for a program that might change
and particularly the extent of the time it required as opposed to something that someone on staff could do.
Mr. Leiter stated that the primary work being done by Mr. Heiter had to do with identifying the signs that
need to be abated and bring those forward to the process. Once the applicant was brought to the Planning
Department, then other staff were actually processing new sign programs. Mr. Heiter's main role was to
enforce the abatement program and to bring the applicants into that process.
Mayor Nader asked, in implementing the abatement program, if it were the same sign ordinance criteria that
was being used to determine what new signs were allowed.
Mr. Leiter answered that the same criteria was applied to new sign programs and replacement signs that
were applied to any other signs.
Mayor Nader stated that he did not think it appropriate to act on this contract this evening with review of
the criteria so close. He hoped much more objective criteria would be adopted that would probably take
less time to apply.
RESOLUTION 16473 OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN MALCOLM, reading of the text was waived, passed and
approved ,b 1 with Mayor Nader opposed.
12. RESOLL1TION 16474 MAKING DECLARATION REGARDING SURPLUS IN THE IMPROVEMF2qr
FUND FOR EASTLAKE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 85-2 - The City has conducted proceedings and completed
construction of Assessment District 85-2 improvements pursuant to the terms and provisions of the Municipal
Improvement Act of 1913. Now that all improvements and payments of all claims are completed, the City
Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 4
needs to dispose of the remaining surplus in the fund in accordance with Section 10427.01 of the Streets
and Highways Code. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public Works)
Councilman Malcolm stared he assumed there was no pre-penalty on calling the bonds in early on the
Assessment District.
Lyman Christopher, Director of Finance, answered that there was a 5% premium to call the bonds in early.
Councilman Malcolm asked if an arbitrage could be earned by waiting or if staff was mandated ro call the
bonds.
Mr. Christopher said with the current market they were not earning any arbitrage. An option was given,
by stare law, when there was a surplus fund to either credit the future assessment, the homeowners, or to
call the bonds. Staff was recommending the bonds be called.
Councilman Malcolm asked if by leaving the money in some type of interest bearing accounts if the
homeowners would not be better off.
Mr. Christopher answered he did not think the homeowners would be better off in that instance because
the interest rates the City was paying on the bonds was a little over 8%. The bonds were issued in 1987
and the current average interest rate on short term investments was around 4 1/2% to 5% so the City would
be paying more interest on the bonds.
Councilman Malcolm asked when the pre-payment penalty ended and when they were callable.
Mr. Christopher answered 5% any time there was a early call on the bonds and were callable twice a year
on either March 2 or September 2. Bur since they were 20 year bonds, the term would be through the year
2006 unless they were called early which was what staff suggested.
13. REPORT PARKDEVELOPMENTIMPACTFEEFORAPARTMENTS-Staffrecommends
item be continued to meeting of 1/28/92. (Director of Parks & Recreation)
14. REPORT BY THE CITY ENGINEFA~ ON COST OF WORK FOR THE 1911 BLOCK ACT
- PHASES XIX THRU XXII CASH CONTRACT - On 12/11/90, Council held a public hearing on the 1911
Block Act - Phases XIX thru XXII Cash Contract and adopted Resolution 15979 making findings at the public
hearing pursuant to Chapter 27 of the "Improvement Act of 1911." Exhibit B is a spreadsheet which was
supplied to Council at the time of the public hearing. The exhibit identifies the parcels to be assessed by
assessment number, indicates the type of improvements to be constructed for the parcel, and denotes for
each parcel an estimate of: the total cost of the improvement; the estimated City contribution towards the
cost of the improvements; and, the estimated property owners' costs for the improvements. Of the 43 parcels
shown on Map 90-4, one property owner (Assessment No. 17) chose to install the improvements by private
contract, one property (Assessment No. 20) was removed from the district at the request of the property
owners and approval by Council. Improvements for the remaining 41 parcels were installed under a
construction contract. The attached Engineer's report indicates the construction costs and quantities for each
of the remaining parcels as well as the City's contribution towards the construction costs. Staff recommends
acceptance of the report and setting 2/11/92 as the date for the public hearing on the assessments to be
placed on the various parcels. (Director of Public Works)
Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page S
15. REPORT PURCHASE OF FOURTRANSITBUSES - On 12/10/91, the City's Purchasing
Agent received bids on behalf of Scoot for four buses for the Chula Vista Transit fleet. Four bids were
received. The low bidder was Sunset Bus and Commercial, Inc. distributor for Goshen Coach, Inc., Elkhart,
Indiana, in the amount of $323,259.35, or a unit cost of $80,814.84. Staff recommends acceptance of the
bid and awarding a contract to Sunset Bus and Commercial, Inc. for four buses to be manufactured by
Goshen Coach, Inc. (Director of Public Works)
Councilman Malcolm asked if the City would be better off buying the same type of bus because of repairs,
stocking the same parts, etc.
Bill Gustafson, Transit Coordinator, answered that the specifications for the four new buses were for a
different type of vehicle. The buses were built primarily on a truck chassis. The reason for that was they
were going to be used primarily for the Nature Interpretive Center. Staff decided on that type of bus was
because of the operating conditions of the road and because there was quite a price difference between the
two types of buses and that was primarily the operating budget.
* * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * *
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND I~F. IATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCF-q
The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. ffyou ~
to speak to any item, please fill out the *Request to Speak Form* available in the lobby and ~ubmit it to the
City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staft recomm~/ldation;
complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the sta~recornrnerldation-) CornmeritS are limited to five
minutes per individual.
16. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDING THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE TO ESTABLISH
FEES FOR SPECIAL EVENTS (CONCERTS, CIRCUSES, CARNIVALS) TO FULLY RECOVER STAFF COSTS -
As necessary staff work and ratification of community groups is not completed, staff recommends item be
postponed and rescheduled for Public Hearing at a later date. (Director of Finance)
MSUC (Nader/Malcolm) to postpone the Public Hearing to a later date.
17. PUBLIC HEARING PCC-92-13, APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF A REQUEST
FOR MODIFICATION TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A THRIFT STORE AT 741 BROADWAY- SKILL
CENTERS OF AMERICA - The appellant has requested modification of an approved conditional use permit
to allow 7,000 square feet rather than 1,000 of floor area to be utilized for clothing sales. The Planning
Commission denied the request based on inadequate on-site parking to accommodate the expected increase
in parking demand brought about by the proposed increase in clothing sales area. Staff recommends
approval of the resolution. (Director of Planning)
Mayor Nader said that in the letter from Keith Davis, the CEO of Skill Centers, Mr. Davis listed a number
of additional off-site parking spaces that would be available. He asked if staff had any comment on what
impact, if any, that would have on the application.
Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 6 _
Mr. Leiter answered that on-street parking spaces were not formally considered because those were to be
shared by other businesses in the area and staff felt that on-site parking spaces were the only ones that were
relevant to the application.
Mayor Nader said the letter indicated there were 33 adjacent parking spaces available. He asked if there
were agreements making those spaces available, how that would affect staffs recommendation.
Mr. Leiter responded that if they were both available and were readily accessible to the site so that the
shoppers at the facility would be able to access them and know that they were available, that could affect
staffs recommendation.
Steve Griff'm, Senior Planner, said the applicant did not propose any specific propositions for parking on
adjacent sites. The letter the Mayor referred to was referencing on-street parking. The code would allow
for parking agreements for parking spaces within 200 feet of the site if there was some kind of permanent
agreement that could serve to meet the parking requirements.
John Goss, City Manager, said he thought one of the problems was that although parking might be available
on the street, it may not be used by adjacent commercial enterprises right now, but there was no guarantee
that in 5 or 10 years that would still be the case.
Councilwoman Grasser Horton asked if the Veterans Thrift Store had a parking problem since they had 8,000
to 9,000 square feet of clothing space, and they had 26 on-site parking spaces.
Mr. Leiter said staff did some surveys recently and found the parking lot was either totally full or had maybe
one or two spaces available. It was the same with on-street parking spaces in the vicinity of that particular
store.
Mayor Nader stated that he had a conflict of interest because his former home was within 300 feet of
Southbay Chevrolet and, therefore, he would abstain.
This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open.
There being no public testimony, the public hearing was declared closed.
Councilman Moore stated that he had looked at the site. He asked if there was some reason staff felt they
could not park on the west side of that parking lot?
Mr. Leiter said they looked at the standards for parking space and the back out requirements. He stated they
needed a tum around space at the end of the lot so we removed one parking place for the turn around.
Based on the City's parking standards, we were able to come up with nine additional parking spaces with
the back out area which is a little shorter than it should be.
Councilman Moore asked if staff was saying that if they put spaces diagonal there could not be parking on
both sides, east and west.
Mr. Leiter answered that was correct and stated that this barely meets our standards for backing out and
parking spaces.
Councilman Malcolm said there were a number of thrift stores already in Chula Vista. He understood that
the thrift stores were nonprofit, that they did good, but there were too many thrift stores in that same area.
He did not believe that was setting the goals or the aims that the Council wanted in their City in trying to
Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 7
improve the quality of life, improve the image of the City, or improve the shopping in that area. He believed
the Planning Commission and staff made the right recommendation.
Councilman Moore felt the parking could be calculated a different way and some flexibility could be made.
RESOLUTION 16475 WAS OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN RINDONE, reading of the text was waived.
The public hearing was reopened for five minutes.
Keith Davis, 5700 Baltimore, La Mesa, CA 91942, distributed information on Skill Centers of Amerlca. He
stated that the Skill Center of America was a nonprofit organization founded in 1986 and since that time
they had helped many disadvantaged and disabled people throughout the county. There were currently two
thrift swres, and they depended on the revenue from the stores as means of support. They had no
government funding. They thought the location at 741 Broadway would be a good location for an additional
thrift store. Skill Centers of America was also a college which had been certified by the State Department
of Education. He stated that more parking could be utilized in the area.
Stuart Huvwitz, 9605 Scranton Road, Suite 850, San Diego, CA 92121, stated the property had been in his
wife's family for years. As far as they knew when the building was constructed, it was in accordance with
all the building codes. Over the years there had never been any notices received by them that they were
in violation of any City laws and did not understand staffs recommendation. He stated that Mr. Davis
wanted to use the building as a retail store.
Mr. Leiter said as long as the property continued to be used for the sale of furniture, it conformed to codes.
By changing it to general retail, it required one parking space per 200 feet rather than I parking space per
600 feet.
There being no further public testimony, the public hearing was declared dosed.
Councilwoman Grasser Horton asked how long Skill Centers of America wanted to lease the building.
Mr. Davis answered five years with a five year option.
VOTE: 2-2-0-1, with Councilman Moore and Councilwoman Grasser Horton opposed and Mayor Nader
abstaining.
Councilman Malcolm stated that Mayor Nader would be able to participate on the item within a few months.
If the applicant wanted to proceed and if they could prove their parking needs, the applicant could return
to staff and the City Council by showing them what they were generating in traffic and why a new variance
should be given.
RESOLUTION 16475 DENYINGTHEAPPEALOFPCC-92-13OFAREQUESTFORMODIFICATION
TO A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A THRIFT STORE AT 741 BROADWAY - SKILL CENTERS OF
AMERICA
Minutes
January21,1992
Page 8
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Joe Balanga, 1284 4th Ave., Chula Vista, CA, stated that he considered the City like a corporation with the
Mayor the CEO, the Council its Board of Directors, and he a share holder. He said he did not want his
Mayor and City Council to be tied to a Mayor's Handbook. He stated they were intelligent individuals and
thought they could operate the City with a lot of hindsight and a lot of logic to solve the City's problems.
ACTION ITEMS
18. RESOLUTION 16467 MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT RELATING TO THE FEASIBILITY OF
MYfIGATION MEASURES AND PROJECT ALTERNATIVES, ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED MIDBAYFRONT
CONCEFfUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN; *SUBCOMMh-i-KE RECOMMENDATION* (ALTERNATIVE 8, WITH
MINOR MODIFICATIONS) -Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community
Development) Continued from meeting of 1/14/92.
Bruce Boogaard, City Attorney, stated that at the last meeting, Council gave directions to bring back a
resolution that had all the various amendments by Council. A resolution had been given to Council to
articulate those changes. Since then, staff received the Developers comments regarding those changes and
that had been placed on the dias. They were able to articulate staffs recommendations with regard to each
of the Developers proposed changes, to discuss with the Developer staffs recommendations and were able
to report that the Developer was willing to accept the staffs recommendations on a majority of the items.
He proceeded to go over the amendments.
Councilman Malcolm said when the LCP Amendment is submitted, it would not say Cultural Arts Center or
ice skating rink. It would be zoning classifications and permitted uses that would need to go before the
Coastal Commission.
Councilman Moore said there were a lot of things currently listed that would not go into an LCP because
they do not want to tie their hands. Most of it was a conceptual plan that would go in a development
agreement. He said the LCP should have flexibility, the Development Agreement should have all the knots
tied.
City Attorney Boogaard said the Developer similarly argued that many of those conditions belonged in the
Development Agreement and consideration would be given to that argument during the processing stage but
at that time, staff believed they were best imposed as project related conditions.
Councilman Rindone said that what the amendments were proposing to do was look beyond the LCP as to
what the conceptual plan was and give direction to staff as to what the Council's expectations were for a
Development Agreement.
city Attorney Boogaard said the conditions would not be incorporated in only the LCP, but also in the
General Plan Amendment, Redevelopment Plan, Development Agreement and any other zoning entitlements.
He asked for clarification as to how the Council wished to proceed on both the number ofhighrises and their
definition. The General Plan defined a highrise to be eight to fifteen stories, and the EIR considered them -
as greater than ten stories.
Minutes
January21, 1992
Page 9
Mayor Nader said he thought any changes in the General Plan definition of a highrise would be dealt with
at the General Plan amendment stage.
John Moot, Vice Chair, Bayfront Planning Subcommittee, said it was his understanding there would be
flexibility, and it would be an open issue to discuss in the LCP process and the Development Agreement.
He said the subcommittee was given the definition of ten stories as a highrise, but also heard two different
versions of eight and ten.
City Attorney Boogaard asked Council if they were satisfied with the language and instruction that staff was
to process a Plan with no more than four highrises, and a highrise meant any building more than ten stories
tall.
City Attorney Boogaard asked Mr. Peters if it were acceptable, stating that it would allow four buildings
consisting of ~wenty-two stories.
Paul Peterson, representing Chula Vista Investors, answered that it was not acceptable. What was acceptable
was what Mr. Moot had indicated and was what they thought was the arrangement. He said there would
be a Fifth highrise building if the need justified. That was the kind of flexibility they would like to see in
the LCP.
Councilman Malcolm stated he thought they were being aggressive in the plan for four buildings of twenty-
two stories and he would not support that because it was a waste of time; that type of project would not
be approved by the Coastal Commission. He would rather see a highrise building that had less bulk and
more height so not to intrude in the view corridors.
City Attorney Boogaard asked if Council suggested deletion of the definitional language, "the term highrise
means any building more than l0 stories."
Mr. Peterson said they would not object to taking out the definition. They were not asking for four buildings
of twenty-two stories. Their Plan specifically called for three buildings consisting of seventeen stories and
two buildings consisting of twenty-two stories and would like the flexibility to do that. He said they
understand it would be a maker of substantial discussion in the LCP process and also with the Coastal
Commission.
MSC CMalcolm/Moore) to strike item 9 on page 8, 'Family and Luxuxy Homing'. Passed 4-1 with Mayor
Nader opposed.
MSUC tMalcolm/Nader) to amend item 10 on page 8, 'Affordable Homing' to read '...City's policy or pay
into the low/moderate income fund a reasonable or agreed upon fee, an in lieu fee off-site.*
Councilman Rindone said the additional items were to let the developer know what the Council anticipated
for the Development Agreement. The aspect would not be that definitive for the LCP, but would be for the
Development Agreement. He said items should be inserted that would have a positive benefit to the City
and that was what the Phasing Plan for the Development Agreement would do.
Regarding the question of phasing, Mr. Peterson stated they would like to have this included in the
Development Agreement because that goes to the economic viability and economic feasibility of the project.
MS (Malcolm/Grasser Horton) to delete phasing from any LCP documents.
Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 10
MSC [Moore/Nader) substitute motion that staff submit to Council the it~m~ that they recomrn~zid be in the
LCP and/or in the Devdopment Agreement. Approved 4-1 with Councilman Malcolm opposed.
Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, asked Counc~ if the wording regarding traffic was
appropriate to the action Council took the previous week.
City Attomey Boogaard said the motion made was that the level of service "C' be maintained on the adjacent
streets and he had interpreted that to mean compliance with the Growth Management Program which
allowed slight deterioration during peak hours.
Mayor Nader stated that the maker of the motion, Councilman Rindone, indicated that it was consistent.
The condition, as written, required the project to conform to City traffic thresholds which were level of
service 'C' with a narrow exception.
Councilman Rindone stated, for the record, that he did make that motion the previous week and concurred
with staffs recommendation.
City Attomey Boogaard said the Developer had proposed language which would not commit the Developer
to the conditions of the Development Agreement as significantly as staffs proposed language. In condition
17, paragraph C, it was suggested that instead of reading "The Developer shall commit...' that it be changed
to read 'Staff shall attempt to obtain an agreement with the developer in the form of a proposed and
executed Development Agreement..."
Mayor Nader stated that he thought it was Council's intent to say adequate security must be provided or
there would be no project. The attempt must be successful or there would not be an agreement.
City Attorney Boogaard stated that under condition 17 if an agreement was not reached, they could defer
permanent enti~ement, but it would not commit the Developer to the contents of that agreement until they
could at least confer, negotiate, and articulate it by that document.
Councilman Malcolm asked if the Developer's document stated they would agree to placing a completion
bond or other bonded security, to Council's satisfaction, to guarantee those improvements.
City Attomey Boogaard said he would recommend a Development Agreement that would commit the
Developer to a planned security. He hoped to obtain security by means other than by bonds or guarantees.
Mr. Peterson suggested Council use just the first sentence of the Developer's proposed language by saying
"The Development Agreement shall give sufficient assurances to the City, to the CivJ's reasonable satisfaction,
that ..."
City Attorney Boogaard said the Developer had consented to the language regarding the Cultural Arts Facflit~
and agreed with the suggestion to add '.,.but in the absence of reaching terms as to a Development
Agreement wherein the City confers vested fights in the..." There had also been some minor changes to
overriding considerations on pages 73 to 75.
Councilman Rindone said he wanted to reiterate the point about the participation not limited to other
governmental agencies such as the San Diego Unified Port Authority. This was the first time they could look
to a joint powers agreement or whatever would be necessary for the construction of additional major public
facilities.
Mayor Nader called a recess at 8:32 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:47 p.m.
Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 11
Will Hyde, 803 Vista Way, Chula Vista, CA 91911, representing Crossroads, stated he personally thought the
City Council was going about the project in the correct way and commended them.
Paul Peterson, 530 B Street, #2300, San Diego, CA 92101, representing Chula Vista Investors, thanked the
City Council for their patience. He stated that even though they were not always in agreement with
everything the Council had done or were doing, they appreciated the way they were going at it and all the
hard work. He said they had acceded to a lot of the wording, but did not necessarily endorse Mr. Boogaard's
footnotes and he wanted to make that clear. There were still some points of differences that they thought
would be argued about later. He asked the Council to direct staff to return in 2 or 4 weeks with a schedule.
He stated that the schedule would help them, the Council, and staff.
Lynn Mergell, 7475 Cartie Ridge Way, San Diego, CA 92139, spoke in opposition to staff recommendation.
Steve Ezakovich, 7475 Cartie Ridge Way, San Diego, CA 92139, spoke in opposition to staff recommendation.
Robert Lane, 243 Minor Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, spoke in opposition to staff recommendation.
Councilman Malcolm stated that, as a Council, they wanted the infrastructure, the road widenings, the sandy
beach, the lagoons, and the parks built in the first phase. They also wanted the public infrastructure in the
first phase and guarantees in phasings. He stated that the people in the South Bay deserved the same type
and quality of development that those people in San Diego, Mission Bay and elsewhere had. He did not
believe that it was worth the City Attorney°s time, effort and cost to try to get some type of guarantee on
the whole project. He stated that he wanted guarantees on phases. He said the Council was going to decide
what those phases were, what was in each phase, what was going to be build first and what guarantees they
wanted at a later date.
MS ClVlalcolm/Grasser Horton) to look for security from the developer to guarantee all improvement~ that
are required of him during each phase.
Councilman Malcolm asked Mr. Boogaard to explain on those pages what areas needed to be deleted if the
motion passed.
City Attorney Boogaard said paragraph 16 on page 9 simply required a phasing plan prior to giving
entitlements on the project. Paragraph C on page 10, required a security program that would incorporate
bonds and guarantees. He recommended Council approve the suggested wording on page 10, item 11,
which was satisfactory language to accomplish what the Council was trying to achieve.
MSUC (Pindone/Moore) to approve the wording on page 10, item 11, 'The Development Agreement shall
give sufficient assurances to the City, to the City's reasonable satisfaction, that the different phases of the
project prior to commencement of any such phase will be completed. It is the intent of this paragraph that
the completion of all public infrastructure shall be guaranteed or otherwise suitably bonded prior to
commencemant of any such infrasll'ucture and that the completion of each private smacture shall be
guaranteed or suitably bonded prior to the commencement of construction of any such private structure.'
RESOLHTION 16467 WAS OFFERED BY COUNCILMAN RINDONE, reading of text was waived. passed and
approved unanimously, as mended, 'APPROVING THE MIDBAYFRONT CONCEFFUAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
(SUBCOMIVIITI'EE ALTERNATIVE) WITH MODIFICATIONS. MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT ~ RI ATING TO THE
FEASIBILITY FO MITIGATION MEASURES AND PROJECT ALTERNATIVES, ADOPTING A MITIC_~A'HON
MONITORING PROGRAM, AND A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION.'
Minutes
January21, 1992
Page 12
Councilman Moore stated that the minutes should reflect that the amendments consisted of, B-9 deleted, B-
10 amended, and C amended.
Councilman Rindone said what he thought the Council did was very significant and not picked up by the
news media because of the late hour. There were significant changes and amendments that the Council put
forth and approved unanimously. What the Council had done was torn this into a Chula Vistan Plan,
providing amenities and facilities that the City of Chula Vista had never seen or perhaps would never be able
to anticipate without a comprehensive project put forth. He joined his colleagues in looking forward to
actoaily seeing the Plan that would envision and enrich the community, provide those amenities, and provide
the quality of life that they looked forward to experiencing in Chula Vista.
Councilman Moore asked what the next steps would be and when it would come back to Council as an LCP
changes.
Mr. Salomone responded that staff could retorn in two weeks with a schedule.
MSUC OLindone/Malcolm) to forrealize what had been discussed and for staff to come back in two weeks
with a time line on the resolution passed for the conceptoal plan for the Bayfront,
19. REPORT CHULA VISTA TRANSIT (CVT) ROUTE 703 OPERATION ON OLEANDER
AVENUE BETWEEN ORANGE AVENUE AND SEQUOIA SIKEET - This report discusses concerns about CVT
Route 703 operation on Oleander Avenue between Orange Avenue and Sequoia Street expressed by certain
residents in the area. Staff recommends approval to retain the current 703 Route structure and a reduction
of three evening trips, with the last departure from the "H" Street Trolley Station at 9:15 p.m. (Director of
Public Works)
Thomas McFadden, 1546 Olive Ave., Chula Vista, CA 91911, spoke in opposition to staff recommendation
stating he was in favor of buses being re-routed.
William F. Speir, 1543 Oleander Ave., Chula Vista, CA 91911, spoke in opposition to staff recommendation
stating they wanted a quieter and cleaner residential neighborhood and suggested an alternative route for
the buses.
Grant Hyde, spoke in favor of staff recommendation. He said he rode the Route 703 bus every day.
Mayor Nader stated, as he understood it, the request of the first two speakers would not eliminate bus
service in the area but would run the buses down Brandywine to Main Street and then up Oleander, instead
of running both ways on Oleander.
Mr. Gustarson stated that staff had received a few requests. One was to use 805 to come back north and
the other was to go the opposite direction on Oleander. Initially the bus went two directions around the
loop and at the request of a couple of the parties, the bus was re-routed to go in one direction only, south
on Oleander, around the loop in a counter-clockwise direction.
Joshua Joe spoke in favor of staff recommendation.
Councilman Moore stated no matter how the bus was routed, it would go up hill.
MS t'Malcolm/Moore) to accept the staff recommendation.
Minutes
January21, 1992
Page 13
Mayor Nader asked if there would be any advantage to reversing the direction of the bus at that loop or
disadvantage from a transit standpoint.
Mr. Gustarson answered that it really did not matter which direction was used. He stated that the reason
the route had been reversed was because staff was requested to do that by the Speirs. A neighbor across
the street said that was worse because all the buses went in front of her house. From an operation
standpoint it really would not matter in what direction the bus went - clockwise, counter-clockwise or
bi-directional.
Councilman Moore asked if more noise was created by braking when going down hill.
Mr. Gustarson stated that the grade going south on 0leander was less than the other direction going west
on Sequoia and then north. That was the primary reason staff made the change to go south on Oleander.
He said there was more of a grade going west on Sequoia and therefore potentially more brake noise.
Mayor Nader asked if an analysis had been done on what the demand would be for ridership on Main Street
with the development going on there.
Mr. Gustafson answered no analysis had been done. He said before the change was made in July, staff went
to Main then up Oleander and found little ridership on the southern part of Oleander near Main. He
thought as development occurred on Main it would reconfigure the route structure in the future then staff
would probably direct a route on Main.
Mayor Nader stated because of the considerable industrial and commercial development plans in that area,
hopefully there would be an increase in ridership. He stated he would offer as an amendment that staff be
directed to return to Council with a report on anticipated increases and demands on Otay Valley Road as
further development occurs.
Motion: {Nader) to direct staff to bring back a report to Council some lime this year on anticipated impacts
of further development on Otay Valley Road. Motion failed for lack of second.
Councilman l~indone said he believed the reason there was not a second was because that was asking staff
to do the job that they were indicating they were going to do, and staff did not anticipate any significant
change within the next 12 months. He said he thought Mr. Gustarson was trying to give Council his best
guess of anywhere between 2 to 3 years before that would change.
Vote on motion to accept the staff recommendation, passed 5-0.
Councilman Moore asked if something could be done to restrict the amount of exhaust from buses and what
it would cost per bus.
Councilman Rindone said that in the motion passed was the elimination of the three late-evening bus routes
but not any data or information in the report about the earliest two runs. It had been indicated that there
was not ridership at all on the earliest one. He asked Mr. Gustafson if he had any data on the earliest two
routes and if that had any significant impact. He said if there was no ridership, staff may want to look at
the other end of the spectrum as well.
Mayor Nader asked what staff was going to do to reduce the exhaust.
Mr. Gustarson said he would look into it but did not think there was much that could be done to the present
vehicles. There were two things in the future that would reduce or minimize exhaust. One was relative to
Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 14
the clean air act alternative fuel vehicles. What was being developed was a particular trap for diesel engines
and the traps would significantly cut down on the emission from diesel engines. The longer term answer
would be as we those vehicles were replaced over the next few years, the City would be getting cleaner
burning vehicles.
Mayor Nader asked if the new route schedules Council approved the previous year had been posted around
the City and if those schedules were up-to-date.
Mr. Gustarson answered yes, staff had distributed that schedule and modifications were made throughout
the year to keep the schedules up-to-date. There were a number of outlets where the schedules were
distributed and were also posted at selected bus stops.
20. RESOLUTION 16383 AUTHORIZING THE INSTALLATION OF A PAINTED TRAFFIC MEDIAN ON
'E' b'I'KEET BETWEEN FIRST AVENUE AND SECOND AVENUE; AND, ESTABLISHING A NO PARKING ZONE
ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF 'E' STREET BETWEEN SECOND AVENUE AND THIRD AVENUE - Area
residents have requested the installation of a two-way left turn lane on the 200 block of "E~ Street to improve
traffic flow and safety. Since "E' Street was recently overlaid, staff would like to make striping changes to
the 100 and 200 blocks of "E" Street. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Public
Works)
Cliff Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works, said there was one minor correction to the staff report, the
second recommendation where it read "prohibiting left turns between First Avenue and the 100 block of
Minor' should read 'between Second Avenue and the 100 block of Minor" and that was consistent with item
#5 on page 3 and the summary.
Councilman Moore asked if there were any objections to what staff was recommending to Council as to
prohibiting parking.
Mr. Swanson answered not that staff knew of.
Barbara Ogel, 266 Second Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910, stated that as long as left turns were allowed on
First and Second she was satisfied.
Eunice D. ThroweL 227 Alpine Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910, stated that the letter she received said
"painting a median island prohibiting left turns between First Avenue and the 100 block" and they were in
the 200 block which meant they would not be able to turn left. But now they learned that they could still
turn left.
Thomas J. Wood, 279 Alpine Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910, stated he too had received a letter and now
learned that what was in the letter had been changed. He wanted to know why they had received the wrong
information.
Mayor Nader asked ff the letter sent to residents was included in the council packets.
Mr. Swanson answered no, that the letter sent to residents probably repeated the recommendation as seen
on the agenda statement. He stated that it should be noted that he corrected staffs recommendation and
that was probably where the error crept in if there was a misunderstanding in that letter. -
Robert Lane, 242 Minot Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910, stated he was not opposed to staffs corrected
recommendation but was opposed to taking parking away from Alpine to Minot.
Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 15
Leonard Aguillard, 138 Minor Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910, spoke in opposition to staff recommendation.
Laura Graudushus, 111 "E" Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910, asked if there were changes being made between
Minot and First Avenue.
Mr. Swanson stated that no changes were proposed between Minor and First Avenue.
Murphy Stumph, 114 "E" Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910, stated he would like to see the speed limit lowered.
Frances Guess, 149 Twin Oak Circle, Chula Vista, CA, spoke in opposition to staff recommendation.
RESOLUTION 16383 AS AMENDED WAS OFFF_AtED BY COUNCILMAN MOORE, reading of the text was
waived, passed and approved to adopt only the paz'c between Second Avenue and Third Avenue with the
remainder being referred back to staff. Approved 4-0-1 with Counc~man Malcolm absent.
BOARD AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
None submitted.
ITEMS pUIJ.I~I~ FROM THE CONSENT CAI.I~NDAR
Items pulled: 5a, 10 & 11. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order.
Became of the lateness of the hour (after 10:30 p.m.) Courteft took the following vote: MSUC
(Moore/Malcolm) to continue with Item 11 and the dosed session, the balance of agenda to be carried over
to the following week.
OTHER BUSINESS
21. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTfS)
22. MAYOR'S REPORT(S)
23. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilman Moore: Review of Council ticlder file. To be continued to 1/28/92.
Minutes
January 21, 1992
Page 16
ADJOURNMENT
The City Council recessed at 10:40 p.m. and met in a closed session at 10:41 p.m. to discuss:
Instructions to negotiators regarding personnel pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6.
Pending litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Jones vs. City of Chula Vista.
Potential litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - Claim of Claudia Esquer.
Adjourned at 10:50 p.m. to the Regular City Council Meeting on January 28, 1992 at 6:00 p.m. in the City
Council Chambers.
Respectfully submitted,
BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk