Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1994/04/05 CC AN ADJOURNED JOINT REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND A JOINT REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIl, OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, April 5, 1994 Council Chambers 7:51 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agency/Council Members Fox, Horton, Moore, Rindone, and Chairman/Mayor Nader ALSO PRESENT: Sid Mores, Assistant Director/Assistant City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, Agency/Council Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 9, 1993, March 1, 1994, March 15, 1994, and March 22, 1994 MSUC (Rindone/Fox) to approve the minutes of November 9, 1994, March 1, 1994, and March 22, 1994 as presented. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: none) BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR OFI, ERED BY AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimnusly. ITEMS UNDER THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE AGENDIZED FOR THE JOINT REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 5, 1994 3. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None. 4.A. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1395 APPROVING ADVANCE ASSISTANCE AND MOVING EXPENSE RELOCATION CLAIMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,850 PURSUANT TO THE ADOFrED RELOCATION PLAN FOR THE RENTAL UNIT HOUSEHOLDS LOCATED AT 459 F STREET WITHIN THE TOWN CENTRE II REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA--The City and Redevelopment Agency recently purchased the property at 459 F Street as part of the adopted Chula Vista Master Plan Expansion Project. The property contains one single-family residence and five rental units on the parcel. In order to utilize the property, the five rental households need to be relocated pursuant to the previously adopted Relocation Plan. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Community Development Director) B. COUNCIL RESOLUTION 17436 AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF $9,850 FROM THE CIVIC CENTER EXPANSION PROJECT (#GG-130) CIP FOR THE PAYMENT OF ADVANCE ASSISTANCE AND MOVING EXPENSE RELOCATION PAYMENTS TO THE RENTAL UNIT HOUSEHOLDS LOCATED AT 459 F STREET 5.A. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1396 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TO SHARE TAX INCREMENT REVENUES GENERATED TO THE AGENCY Minutes April 5, 1994 Page 2 FROM THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA--Califoruia Redevelopment Law Health and Safety Code Section 33401 authorized Community Redevelopment Agencies to enter into agreements to pay any taxing agencies with territory within a redevelopment project area the appropriate amount of money necessary to alleviate any financial burden or detriment caused to the taxing agency by the adoption of the redevelopment project. A final negotiated Agreement for Cooperation with the County seeks to alleviate the potential negative financial impact by sharing a portion of the tax increment revenue generated in the project area. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Community Development Director) B. COUNCIL RESOLUTION 17437 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TO SHARE TAX INCREMENT REVENUES GENERATED TO THE AGENCY FROM THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA 6. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1397 APPROVING AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT (NUMBER TCI/OPA 94-1) WITH MR. DAN JORDAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN OFFICE ADDITION TO THE BUILDING AT 281 G STREET--Mr. Jordan proposes to construct a 657 square foot addition to the existing office building as well as a 400 square foot open deck over the existing garage. The De.siam Review Committee reviewed the proposal and recommended approval subject to certain conditions. Mr. Jordan's proposal is presented to the Agency for consideration and approval of plans through an Owner Participation Agreement. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Department) 7. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1398 APPROVING AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT (NUMBER TCI/OPA 94-2) WITH IDM SATELLITE DIVISION, INC., FOR THE REMODELLING OF THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT 311 F STREET--The applicant proposes to remodel the existing commercial building by adding 630 square feet of space to the existing 6246 square foot building. The remodelling also includes modification to the facade and exterior landscaping. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Director) 8. REPORT ACCEPTANCE OF CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1993 AND AUDITOR'S OPINION--The City's Audited Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended 6/30/93 were prepared by the independent audit firm of Deloitte & Touche. A Redevelopment Agency Statement was also prepared. Staff recommends the Agency accept the reports. (Interim Finance Administrator) * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES None submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None ACTION ITEMS ITEMS//9, #10, AND #11 ARE ADJOURNED REGULAR JOINT MEETING ITEMS CONTINUED FROM THE MEETING OF MARCH 22, 1994 Minutes April 5, 1994 Page 3 9. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1392 APPROVING FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED PALOMAR TROLLEY CENTER DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING CHAlRMAN TO EXECUTE SAME--On 7/23/93 the Agency approv~.l the Amended Palemar Trolley Center Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) for the development of an approximately 190,000 square foot high-volume retail canter in two phases on 18 acre~ on Palemar Boulevard b~twecn Industrial Boulevard and Broadway. This First Amendment to the Amended DDA incoq~orates specific mutual efforts to provide a day care facility near the Center. The Amendment also clearly restates the understanding of the parties regarding extent of mutual exposure to potential litigation costs associated with condemnation suits and freezes the existing rate of City fees which will be applicable to Phas~ 2 of the project. Staff recommends the item be continued to a date not certain. (Community Development Director) MS (Nader/Horton) to continue the item indefinitely. Chris Salemone, Director of Community Development, informed the Agency that negotiations were ongoing and he did not have a certain date as to when it would be brought back. Chairman Nader questioned if the Child Care Commission supported the staff recommendations. Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager, responded that staff had missed sending the item to the commission. Once that omission was detected they went back to the commission and talked to the Chair and would work with them Chairman Nader stated it should be noted in the staff report to the Agency with appropriate minutes attached for review. Agency Member Rindone questioned if staff was continuing negotiations and if the day care center was within the realm of possibility. Mr. Salemone stated that was correct and staff would be returning with options tbr review. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. 10.A COUNCIL RESOLUTION 17412 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH ANDERSON & BRABANT, INC. FOR PROVIDING APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS--Several capital improvement projects are currently budgeted which require additional right-of-way for construction. To expedite the acquisition process, staff must first appraise the value of the property and proposes to contract tbr property appraisal services for a period of one year with a renewable clause for an additional year. Staff has evaluated the proposals for providing professional appraisal services and reconunends Anderson & Brabant, Inc. to provide these services. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) B. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1393 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH ANDERSON & BRABANT, INC. FOR PROVIDING APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Agency/Council Member Moore questioned the rationale utilized in choosing the firms recommended. Clifford Swanson, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer, responded that it was the expertise and relative ranking of each of the tirms in the interview process. The firms that rated highest had the strongest skills in the RESOLUTIONS 17412 AND 1393 OFFERED BY AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimnasly. M~nutes Apdl ~, 1994 Page 4 II.A COUNCIL RESOLUTION 17413 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH RYALS & ASSOCIATES FOR PROPERTY ACQUISITION SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZING THE CffY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE ACQUISITION AGREEMENT(S) AND MAKE PAYMENTS FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY OF UP TO $25,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BUDGETED PROJECTS-Several capital improvement projects are currently budgeted which will require additional right~of-way for construction. To expedite the acquisition process, staff proposes to contract for property acquisition services for a period of one year with a renewal clause for an additional year. Staff has evaluated the proposals and recommends Ryals & Associates to provide these services. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) B. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1394 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH RYALS & ASSOCIATES FOR PROPERTY ACQUISITION SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE ACQUISITION AGREEMENT(S) AND MAKE PAYMENTS FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY OF UP TO $25,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BUDGETED PROJECTS RESOLUTIONS 17413 AND 1394 OI,'I. ERED BY AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE, reading of the text was waived. * * * Agency/Council Member Horton left the meeting at 7:59 p.m. * * * Agency/Council Member Moore questioned whether either of the companies were based, or had an office in Chula Vista. Agency/City Attorney Booganrd stated the contract required the companies obtain a business license. Chairman/Mayor Nader questioned whether a local firm had bid on the project. Clifford Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer, responded that he did not have the list of firms with him. He would provide the Agency/Council with a report listing all of the firms that responded on both items. Chairman/Mayor Nader questioned whether the item was time sensitive. Mr. Swanson responded the City was in the middle of acquisition on several projects that were being held up tbr approval. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he would defer to staff on the issue, but it was surprising that the infbrmation was not included in the report. Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager, responded that staff would provide that information in the future. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-0-1 with Ho~on absent. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Items pulled: none. The minutes will reflect the published agenda order. OTHER BUSINESS 12. DIRECTOR~S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORTIS) - None Minutes April 5, 1994 Page 5 * * * Agency/Council Member Horton returned to the meeting at 8:02 p.m. * * * 13. CHAIRMAN'S/MAYOR'S REPORT(S) 13a. Suspension of Bayfront Negotiations Pending Satisfaction of City/Agency Conditions Chairman/Mayor Nader gave a brief background on the project. He had not seen any indication that Mr. Barkett was on the verge of coming through with an agreement that met conditions as defined by the Agency/Council. He felt the~e was an extraordinary amount of staff time being spent on those negotiations. It was his sense that the Community Development Department could use more staff hours on many other projects to the benefit of the City, but the City was continuing to negotiate with someone who was not coming through with anything to meet the conditions established by the Agency/Council. It was time to send a message to Mr. Barkett that the City was serious about the conditions and parameters set on the Bayfront Plan and would not compromise on the quality or what had to be included. The way to send that message would be to stop going back to Mr. Barkeli and tell him to come back to the City when he met the City's conditions with a specific response that could be taken to the Agency/Council. MS (Nader/Fox) to direct staff to suspend negotiations on a development agreement with Mr. Barkett until such time us he comes forward with a proposal, or someone able to execute a proposal, comes forward with a proposal that substantially meets conditions that the Agency/Council set. Agency/Council Member Fox questioned whether more would be accomplished by suspending negotiations. Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager, responded there was a fundamental legal question that required City staff to negotiate with the owner of the property based on previous Agency direction. In terms of the specific negotiations with Mr. Barkett, staff had a series of on-going meetings which had been frustrating at times and fruitful at times. Staff had been able to reach agreement on a variety of issues and believed there was probably light at the end of the tunnel. In terms of specific timing he felt it would be brought back to the Agency/Council in about two months with a drafl disposition and development agreement or owner participation agreement with the property owner. Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, felt it would be back before the Agency/Council in approxiwately sixty days. Agency/City Attorney Beogaard stated the City granted entitlement for a specific plan and general development plan conditioned on executing a development agreement with the developer. The City could not condition the entitlements on negotiating a development agreement and refuse to participate in negotiations. The statement put forth by the Mayor was different than what had been legally analyzed to the extent that the Mayor had suggested that the City had already negotiated in good faith by laying down a set of conditions, which the City found acceptable, and to suspend further debating about them until the City received a response, which was not a suspension entirely of negotiations, but more a matter of putting the ball in his court to come up with a last, best, and final offer. What was being proposed was not quite a suspension of negotiations, but requiring him to come back with a proposal. Chairraan/Mayor Nader stated he way saying that the Agency/Council had stated the conditions and parameters they were looking for, the ball should be in the develop~?rs court fur a meaningful response fur consideration. Agency/City Attorney Boogaard stated the three avenues were: 1) continue negotiations as presently beiog done; 2) put down a last, best, and final offer; and 3) remove the condition of the entitlement that there must be a development agreement. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he did not want to remove the condition and his intent was not to put the owner in a position where he could not develop. His intent was to stop sending him the message, which he felt the City had been sending, that the majority of the Agency/Councd did not have to be taken seriously regarding the terms Minutes April 5, 1994 Page 6 because staff would meet with him regardless of whether he came close to meeting those terms. He needed to understand that if he could not meet those terms he should seek participation from an agency such as the Port District or a consortinto of other local developers. He was not trying to suggest that the City would not conclude a development agreement with the developer, he was trying to be very clear about what kind of conditions that would be necessary to conclude a development agreement. He felt the weekly meetings were sending a mixed message on that point. Agency/Council Member Rindone concurred with the assessment that the City should not grant any conditions unless a DDA was completed. The last major vote on the Bayfront was a 4-1 vote and he voted no as he felt they should not move forward until there was a development agreement as that was the nexus of the issue before them. He questioned if the Agency/Council could refer the item back to staff to develop an agenda item recommending the suspension of Bayfront negotiations and also allow the developer a chance to participate and respond to that and provide a justification as to why the Agency/Council should not suspend negotiations. Agency/City Attorney Boogaard stated in his business judgement, given the history of negotiations, the Agency/Council should request a report from staff as to the states of negotiations and to propose for Agency/Council approval a last, best, and final offer rather than to phrase it in terms of order to show cause why the City should not suspend the negotiations. Chairman/Mayor Nader questioned whether that would meet Agency/Council Member Rindone's intent. Agency/Council Member Rindone responded that it covered the intent and would provide an opportunity for the developer to assess whether he was interested in continuing under those conditions. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated it would fulfill his intent. He felt the City had made its last, best, and final offer at the last meeting and he did not want to send a message that they were backing off that, but staff could draf~ something that embodied the previous Agency/Council discussion and direction and bring that back as a last, best, and final offer and put that on the table. Agency/Council Member Rindone the concern was whether it was financially feasible, which was the nexus of the entire situation. Agency/Council Member Moore stated he had seen many strong economic efforts fail or be suspended. He did not feel the City should be disappointed that a major project, such as the Bayfront, was not on a platter and ready to go in such economic times. The City would not win by ignoring one of the major property owners of the most valuable property in ChUla Vista. The City could not stop negotiations. Re. development meant the Agency/City was a partner. Agency/Council Member Fox felt Member Moore was correct, it was not an easy issue. He did not want to be personally responsible for slowing things down. While the motion was well intended, he felt the unintended results would be the disruption of negotiations and even further delays. Staff felt they would be returning in sixty days with a DDA. Mr. Salomone stated staff was at a point in the negotiations where the developer would have to spend a lot of money to discover the things that the City needed to know, i.e. engineering constraints on the site, soil conditions, costs of putting in the underground facilities, ability of the shale beneath to support the high rise buildings. The developer was willing to do that and he suspected that he would use the resources from the sale of the parcel in National City to do that discovery on the project. He did not feel staff could bring back a development agreement, but the framework of a development agreement within sixty days. He felt it would be the end of the year before they had the development agreement because of the geotechnical, soil, and physical analysis that had to be done. Chairman/Mayor Nader questioned if Mr. Barkett needed to get all the information described in order to continue fruitful negotiations for a DDA. Minutes April 5, 1994 Page 7 Mr. Salomone responded that the DDA would talk to the feasibility of the project, the financial partners, etc. and there were key elements that were unknown. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he understood that and agreed with it, but if there were key elements that needed to be known before concluding a DDA, why was the City sitting down in weekly negotiating sessions instead of saying that the agreement would be hammered out when all the information was available. In the mean time staff could be spending that time developing the high tech/bio tech zone, negotiating with firms interested in locating in Chula Vista, etc. Mr. Salomone responded that staff was providing the develol~r with time frames, fee str~ctures, and the type of data he needed to know, i.e. how long it would take for him to get his grading permit, how much his fees would be, etc. Chairman/Mayor Nader felt that could be provided without extensive staff time. Agency/Council Member Moore questioned what percent of the Economic Development Manager and associated staff time was allocated to the Bayfront. Mr. Salomone responded that none of her time was allocated to the Bayfront. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated she was very short staffed and other personnel in the Community Development Department should be available to assist her. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: (Nader) dire~t staff to develop, based on past Agency/Council discussion and direction, a proposed last, best, and final offer to be brought back to the Agency/Council for consideration so that it would be clear to the Council, staff, and Mr. Barkerr what the City's terms and goals were that needed to be met. Motion died for lack of second. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: (Rindone/Moore) direct staff to bring back within thirty days an updated progress report and recommendation on continuin~ the negotiations. Agency/Council Member Moore questioned if the Maker of the Motion would a~ree to the inclusion of scheduled intents so the report would deal with the past, present, and future. Agreed to by the Maker of the Motion. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated one of his concerns was that there was a very small window of opportunity with the Port District. He questioned whether it would be the intent of the motion that staff would, as part of the report, present options for pursuing Port involvement or any options that would assure that the project would actually be built in a way that would be a credit to the City. Options would include, Port involvement or persuading or inducing Mr. Barkerr to involve other developers or partners. He was very concerned when looking at what happened in National City with the hotel and marina project. He wanted staff to start looking at other options. Agency/Council Member Rindone stated he did not have a problem with that. Shift' had indicated that there were several decision points that the developer had to meet or fold and that would be within the thirty days. Mr. Salomone stated he did not want to classit~' it as being within that thirty days, but he felt it was within sixty days. Staff would have the report back to the Agency/Council in thirty days which would focus the issue for the developer and the City. Agency/Council Member Rindone stated he would not support sixty days for the report and assessment. He felt they needed something in hand to review and evaluate. Minutes April 5, 1994 Page 8 Agency/Council Member Horton stated it was her understanding that the motion on the floor was for sixty days. She would not support thirty days as she did not feel it gave staff or the developer enough time to work on the report. Agency/Council Member Fox felt due to the time sensitivity for Port participation ~hey should move up the date to thirty days for a progress report on potential Port participation. AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (Fox/Horton) to direct staff to return in sixty days (6/7/94) with a progress report and recommendations on continuing the negotiations, and a report in thirty days (5/17/94) regarding the potential of Port involvement in the project. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated the current motion was that the first increment of the report dealing with only the Port participation would be due in thirty days and the second increment of the report and the final offer by the City would be due in sixty days. Agency/Council Member Rindone stated he could support the thirty day period for a report on Port participation but could not support sixty days for the remainder of the report and final offer. Therefore, he would vote against the motion. Chairman/Mayor Nader agreed with Member Rindone's comments. VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: upproved 3-2 with Nader and Rindone opposed. 13b. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he wanted to see the Bayfront developed in a quality fashion. He suggested that prior to approval of the specific development plan that I-2 members of the City Council and Design Review Commission pick out 2-3 examples of where water related urban high rise was done successfully and visit those projects. 14. AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS - None URGENCY ITEM OFF AGENDA: AGENCY RESOLUTION 1399 AUTHORIZING THE USE OF REMAINING FUNDS IN CIP RIft217 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RAMP FROM THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF BRANDYWINE AVENUE TO THE PROPOSED BRANDYWINE PARK SITE--One of the conditions of approval of the Auto Park was the provision of a site for a neighborhood park which was designated in the City's General Plan in the vicinity of the Auto Park site. To access the park site from Brandywine Avenue, a ramp must be provided traversing the slope. The Agency is requested to authorize use of funds remaining in Auto Park Site Acquisition Account for this purpose and to direct the City Manager to authorize Granite Construction Company to complete this work prior to landscaping work being completed on the slope and before Granite Construction removes its equipment from the vicinity in order to save the City money. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Department) Agency Member Moore stated the grading equipment was currently on site and the contract was running out. The ramp needed to be in place before the planting could be done and action by the Agency would make the project more economical. Agency Attorney Boogaard stated the item arose after the preparation of the agenda and could not wait out of necessity until the next agenda. It would take a 4/Sth's vote by the Agency to place it on the agenda for discussion. Fred Kassman, Redevelopment Coordinator, informed the Agency that it would be more costly if action was not taken. Staff received the bids on Monday. Minutes April 5, 1994 Page 9 MSUC (Nader/Moore) to find that an urgency existed, that the item arose after the posting of the agenda and due to necessity could not wait until the next agenda. Agency Attorney Booguard recommended the Agency adopt the resolution to allow using the remaining funds in the auto park project to construct the ramp, waive the bidding process, and authorize the expenditure for the ramp. RESOLUTION 1399 OFFERED BY MEMBER FOX, reading of the text was waived. Chairman Nader requested clarification of where the ramp provided access to. He questioned if the park would be developed in cooperation with the River Valley Regional Park. Agency Attorney Booguard responded that it was from the top of the slope to the proposed park site at the bottom of the slope behind the auto park. Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks & Recreation, responded that it would enhance the plans for the River Valley Regional Park. VOTE ON RESOLUTION 1399: approved unanimously. ADJOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT AT 9:07 P.M. to the Regular Redevelopmeat Agency Meeting on April 19, 1994 at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk by: \~ % :- ;,- ~ ,~ ,X.~ , Vicli c, Soderquist, Deputy~it~, Clerk