Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1995/06/11 CC MINUTES OF A JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, July 11, 1995 Council Chambers 8:59 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER I. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agency/Council M~mhers Alevy, Moot, Padilia, Rindone, and Chair/Mayor Hot|on ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, Director/City Manager; Bnlce M. googaard, Agency/City AHomey; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Jone 20, 1995 and June 27, I995 MSUC (Alevy/Horlon) to approve the ~ninntes nf June 20, 1995 and June 27, 1995 a.s presented. BUSINESS 3. REPORT STATUS OF THE BAYFRONT DEVELOPMENT--The Agency recently requested a status report on development of the Chula Vista Mid-Baylront. Staff recently received and reviewed a Market and Feasibility Sorvey prepared tbr the Mid-Bay~tmf property owner/developer, Adrian Zakkout. Staff is providing a status update to the Agency. Staff recommends acceptance of the report and requests the Agency to name a subcommittee to work with stall in ncgtltiating wilh the developer to expedite development of the Mid- Bayfi-ont. (Community Development Director) Chris Salomone, Director of Community Dcvdopmtzl~t, stated th~ report was a I~asibility presentation prepared by the owner in a very general form that took data previously prepared fi~r th~ prQiect and analyzing it and coming not to aconclusion, but anumber ofconclusion.,,. Stat'fwas r~clmm~endmg Ihat smce very little actual negotiating had occurred on the project since thc new owfler took over the property in 8t-ptculber 1994, and becaus~ the report did not lead to a conclusion, that a deliberate process be set up and a subclmm~ittee of the Council be appointed to assist in that negotiating process. He l~lt the applicant would be willing ill part~cq~ate m a process of weekly or regular meetings to move lbrward in what may he right-sizing or some adjusm~cnt to the prQject to meet both the City and developers needs. Staff recolmnended a subcomn~ittee and direction to pursue negotiations. Member Moot questioned what th~ subcommittee would do with{m| a prl~posal. Mr. Salomone replied that the developers conclusion in the dosing pages tl~ the report was that there were a number of options and he wanted to pursue a low cost negotiating process with th~ City. He felt the City should engage him, at least tor the/breseeable/i. tture, to discover whether agreement could he reached and to bring onto the developers side of the table qualified consultants and studies tl> move fin-,vard, Member Moot stated until the Agency had a proposal there was nothing to analyze or to have a subcommittee meet about or discuss. Once a proposal was received and the Agency knew where the develnper intended to go with the prQ~ect they conld then create a subcommittee. Mr. Salomone responded that it took ahnost nine monlhs to get the study t?om the applicant, which had been promised from the beginning of the applicant's ownership, He snggesled that the applicant be taken up on his willingness to negotiate or he l~lt the pru. iect would just languish. He did not t~el the Agency could fierce the developer to give thein a l~asible proposal. The developer owned the land in fee and he fi~lt sitting at the negotiating table was a way to generate the proposal. Member Padilia stated the entire issue had languished hr too long. The Agency needed to keep itself open to options, but they needed to get something off the ground and moving, He had discnssed the issue with staff and had met with Mr. Zakkout and heard his concerns. Negotiating may in' may not be fruitlid but then the Agency Minutes July 11, 1995 Page 2 and Mr. Za~out could move on. He did not have a problem with the staff recommendation to sit down and start the process. hIS (Alevy/Padilla) to appoint Chair Horton and Member Rindnne to fnrm a subcummitlee to negotiate on the Mid-Bayfront. Member Rindone stated he was disappointed and felt the Agency was going back to the drawing board. The current Agency and past Agency Members wanted a meaningful project that provided amentries to enhance the community, enhance the tax base, and serve as a tourist attraction. The last prc~posal on the Bayfront was exciting and provided a lot of amenities that would not have been otherwise li~asible. He nnderstood that it did not "pencil out", but the Bayfront was the jewel of the City. Anything that was significantly dillerent than the present proposal would take years to achieve due to Coastal Commission approvals, etc. To throw {>tit all the amenitics in the proposal would put the City in a difficult fiscal condition because the Agency needed to advance the redevclopment projects. The debt service for the bonds was not going away and there was a need to get resolution within the next year or two. He declined to participate on the Bayfront Subcommittee due to st~bstuntia[ changes in his work requirement that would not allow him to participate. He would snpport the subcouunittee as the project needed to move t~rward, hut he hoped they would not start with a "blank check" but look at the present ploposal and see how it could he modified. Chair ttorton recommended that Member Moot serve tm the Baytlont Subconullitt~c because he had previously served on the past Bayfront Subcommittee and the Planning Commissilm. FRIENDLY AMENDSlENT: (Alevy) to appuint Member Mnot tn the Bayf'rm~t Subcmnmlttee. Member Moot stated that would be acceptable, but betbre the Agency voted he wanted to echo what Member Rindone had stated. If the Agency went back to ground zero on tile pr{~ject he wanted t~ be counted out. He had spent a lot of time, every two weeks for 9-10 months, at gronnd zero to consider all options. Through a very deliberative process they came up with a conclusion that some type of commercial/resort destination prqject was needed. He did not feel that would fundamentally change. He was not going to go backwards on the prqject and he did not intend to play a lot of games. If there were proposals tn modil~ the project to make it economically more feasible then he was willing to meet. If there was some idea that it wonld be Disney World, etc. he did not want to participate. Member Alevy stated he had met with Mr, Zakkout and had ch~ck~d out some of his properties and had receivcx] rave reviews. He did not believe they were going to ground zero, but I~lt they were Iol~king at some subtle changes that Mr. Zakkout wanted implemented. If the Agency dealt in good thith and quickly he t~lt there would be a pmiect that everyone could be proud of. He l~lt the developer was capable of doing things quickly and did not have to worry about funding. He t~lt the Agency slmuld be positive about the action taken. VOTE ON MOTION: approved ununimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 4. PUBLIC HEARING JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL HEARING PURSUANT TO THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE AND CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33431 AND 33433 REGARDING THE PROPOSED DISPOSITION BY THE AGENCY OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 760 BROADWAY COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELV 2.53 ACRES TO BROADWAY VILLAGE BUSINESS HOMES, L.P. AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF SAID PROPERTY INTO A 36-UNIT MIXED-USE BUSINESS HOMES PROJECT, SUCH PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING SPECIFIC PROPOSED ACTIONS:--The City Council and Redevelopment Agency are requested to hold the requisite public hearings and take the actions necessary to approve the Broadway Business Homes Project and authorize execution of a Disposition and Development Agreement with Joelea Enterprises (Josef and Lenore Citron) for the development of the prc~iect. Actinns reqnired inclnde a zoning change liar the project from Thoronghfare Commercial to Central Commercial-Precise Plan; a Special Use Permit with Shared Parking Agreement to establish the mixed-use pmiect; and approval of a Precise Plan with Condltinns Minutes July II, 1995 Page 3 tbr development of the Project and approval of the DDA, and sale of the property without public bidding. Staff recommends the Council and Agency approve the resolutions and place the Ordinance on first reading. (Colnmunity Development Director) 1. Review and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendure IS-95-03 2. Approval of an amendment to the zoning map or maps ~hiblished by Section 19.18.010 nf the Chula Vista Municipal Code by rezm~ing the 2.532 acre parcel located at 760 Broadway within the Southwest Redevelo~ment ~ject Area from C-T (Cmnmercial Thoroughfare) to C-C-P (Central Commercial with ~ecise Plan) 3. Issuance ofa Sp~ial Use Permit to construct a 36-uoit commercial/residential mixed-use project with Shared Parking Agreement 4. Approval of a ~ecise Plan to allow construction of a 36-unit mixed-use prl~ject including ~snciated site improvemeng 5. Approval of a Disposition and Development Agreement between the Agency and Joelen Enterpris~ A. RESOLUTION 17964 RESOLUTION 1~0 ADORING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ADDENDUM IS-95-03 FOR A 36-UNIT BUSINESS IIOMES PROJECT AT 760 BROADWAY g. ORDINANCE 2636 AMENDING TIlE ZONING MAP OR MAPS ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 19.18.010 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE BY REZONING THE 2.53 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 760 BROAD~VAY WITIIIN Tile SOUTHXVEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA FRONI C-T (COMMERCIAL TIIOROUGIIFARE) TO C-C-P, CENTRAL COM~IERCIAL WITH PRECISE PLAN (Fi~t Reading) C. RESOLUTION 1~1 MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND GRANT~G A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR THE DE~LOPMENT OF A MIXED-USE PROJECT KNOB AS T~ BROADWAY BUS~SS HO~gS PROJECT, LOCATED AT 760 BROADWAY WITHIN THE SOUTH~ST REDE~LOP~IENT PROJECT AREA TO BROADWAY VILLAGE BUSINESS HOMES, L.P. D. RESOLUTION 1462 RESOLUTION 17965 APPROVING A PRECISE PLAN FOR TtlE BROADWAY BUSINESS HOMES PROJECT AND A DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH BROADWAY BUSINESS HOMES, L.P., AND AUTHORIZING TIlE CHAIR TO EXECUTE SAME E. RESOLUTION 1463 WAIVING TllE CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS, AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A TWO-PARTY AGREENIENT BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS FOR SOIL TESTING AND REMEDIATION CONSULTINGSERVICESAT760BROADWAY, ANDAPPROPRIATING FUNDSTHEREFOR--Demolition of buildings at the Fuller Ford site will necessitate removal of c¢~ntaminated soils. It will be necessary to have a qualified ha~rdous materials consultant present during demolition. Staff recon~nmnds approval of the resolution. Not a part of the hblic Hearing, but a related ile~n. (Commnnity Development Director) Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, stated the Agency/Council was being asked to approve a number of actions to complete the process on the Broadway Business Hon~es. The Development Agreement had been negotiated over the last ten days and a copy of the final document was on the dais. gefBre taking the recommended actions he staled an outstanding ~ssue runic t() light on Monday and was nut part of the Development Agreement. The issue could be discussed in Open Session or Closed Session. h dealt with the purchase price and acqnisition of the property. He did not characterize any of the negotumons as bad hith, it had been done in good hith on both sides of the table, and ~t was just a last mintfie issue. Pending the resolution of that issue Options were befi~re the Agency/Council liar action. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. Minutes July 11, 1995 Page 4 · ' Josef Citron, 761 Golden Park, San Diego. CA, stated he ',,~.as a little taken hack by the process at the meeting. He did not know that there was anything to address and t~lt it was appropriate/br Council to meet in Closed Session in order to discuss the issue and then any response brought back from the Agency/Council he would be happy to address. He felt that would be a better prucedure. · * * Council met in Closed Session at 9:18 p.m. and recnnvened at 10:06 p.m. * * * Mr. Boogaard recommended that unless the applicant wanted to address the Agency/Council, the Chair/Mayor open the hearings so the item would not have to be republished, and continue the ~tems to a meeting on July 15, 1995 recognizing that staff had been given negotiating instructions to Meet & Confer with the applicant t~3r the next two weeks. MSUC (Horton/Padilla) to continue the item to a meeting m~ July 25, 1995. Agency/Council Member Moot questioned whether the developer shlluld he g~ven slnnc ~xptanation. He stated that the Agency/Council was not prepared to approve the Develolmaent Agreement as submitted. Mr. Citron stated he needed direction because they ,.vele being told by SDG&E that they needed a check by l:00 p.m. on Wednesday in order to bring the gas into the prc. perty. They had fimr other checks that had to be written beli~re the end of the week. The architect was to submit to the Building Deparm~cnt, in ten days, the bnilding plans fbr the project based on the understanding that there would be a resolution at the meeting. He wa,',te:i statue direction. Chair/Mayor Horton recommended that Mr. Citron meet with Mr. Salomlme and then return to the issue later in the agenda. Mr. Boogaard stated that unless the Agency/Council had some overriding need to say something he reo~mmended that the Agency/Council not respond to whether or not the developer should incur costs on the pmiect. Staff had been given instructions to meet with the applicant and staff would do that after the meeting lit first thing in the morning. Chair/Mayor l-torton requested the Mr. Salomone meet with Mr. Citrlm. Mr. Salomone stated Item E on the agenda waived the consultant plocess and authorized the execution of an agreement and that could be approved contingent upon successlid negotiation of the issue. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Ntme OTHER BUSINESS 5. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) - None 6. CHAIR'S/I~IAYOR'S REPORT(S) - None 7. AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER COMN/ENTS Member Rindone a. Status report on negotiations of the Broadway Business Homes Prqject. The retlt~est is to discuss in Closed Session. Member Rindone stated the item had been discussed at the last Redevelopmcnt ~,gcncy Menring and he did not have a need to discuss it again. Minutes July 11, 1995 Page 5 ADJOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT AT 10:13 P.M- to the Regular Redevclopment Agency Me~ting on August 1, 1995 at 4:00 p.m., innnediately tbllowing the City Council meeting. in the City Council Chambers. CLOSED SESSION The Agency met in Closed Session at 10: 15, recemvened at I1:15 p.m., and ac~ioumed at 11:16 p.m. 8. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING: Anticipated litigation pursuant tn Gnvernment Code Sectinn 54956.9(b) Chula Vista Auto Park developers - South, Bay Chevrolet and Fuller Ford/Honda/Kia v. City/Redevelopment Agency based on statements made in June 8th letter fi'om Auto Park developers to staff Continued from the meeting of June 27, 1995 9. REPORT OF ACTIONS TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION - No reportable actions were taken in Closed Session. Rcspectfull3. submitted. BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC/AAE, City Clerk Vicki C. Soder,.iuist, CMC,_lpeputy City Clerk