Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1996/05/21 CC MINUTES OF A JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, May 21, 1996 Public Services Building 9:32 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agency/Council Members Alevy, Moot, Padilla, Rindone , and Chair/Mayor Horton ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, Director/City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, Agency/City Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 7, 1996 MSUC (Padilla/Moot) to approve the minuteS of May 7, 1996 as preSented. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: none) 3. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None. 4. RESOLUTION 1495 APPROVING FINAL RELOCATION ASSISTANCE PAYMENT TO AUGUSTIN REYES RESULTING FROM EM/NENT DOMAIN ACTION REGARDING PALOMAR TROLLEY CENTER--The Agency acquired through eminent domain action the La Mission Mi Cabana restaurant and nightclub from Mr. Reyes in pursuit of the Disposition and Development Agreement for the Palomar Trolley Center. The Agency's relocation consultant has submitted a payment request to the Agency for relocation costs the Agency agreed to pay in the stipulation of judgment. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Director) 5. RESOLUTION 18308 and RESOLUTION 1496 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH LIPMAN STEVENS MARSHALL & THENE, INC. FOR PROVIDING APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS--Several currently budgeted capital improvement projects require additional right-of-way for construction. To expedite the acquisition process, staff must first appraise the value of the property and is requesting to contract for property appraisal services for a one-year period with a renewable clause for an additional year. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) 6. RESOLUTION 18309 and RESOLUTION 1497 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH RYALS AND ASSOCIATES FOR PROVIDING RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION AND RELOCATION SERVICES FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS--Several currently budgeted capital improvement prqiects require additional right-of-way for construction. To expedite the acquisition process, staff proposes to contract l'i~r property acquisition and relocation services for a one-year period with a renewable clause fur an additional year. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES None submitted. Minutes May 21, 1996 Page 2 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None ACTION ITEMS 7.A. RESOLUTION 18310 ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-93-07; ADOPTING ADDENDUM TO NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-93-07A AND ADOPTING ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING NO SIGN1FIC~ IMPACT FOR TROLLEY TERRACE TOWNHOMES; APPROVING A CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS WITH SOUTH BAY COMMUNITY SERVICES WITH RESPECT TO 1.16 ACRES OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 746 AND 750 ADA STREET FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN 18 UNIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPLEX; AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE DOCUMENTS; AND APPROVING A FUNDING COMMITMENT OF $509,311 FROM THE HOME PROGRAM FUNDS TO BE LOANED FOR SUCH DEVELOPMENT COMPLEX--The Council on 7/19/94 approved purchase of the two parcels for the purpose of developing an affordable for sale housing development with associated child care facility as part of the Palomar Trolley Shopping Center development. South Bay Community Services proposed to build the affordable housing and intends to develop the child care center. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. [4!Sths Vote Requ!red on Item II.B~] (Community Development Director) B. RESOLUTION 1498 and RESOLUTION 18311 APPROPRIATING $643,000 OF HOME FUNDS AND DEPOSITING THOSE FUNDS IN THE AGENCY'S LOW/MODERATE INCOME HOUSING FUND AS REPAYMENT FOR FUNDS PREVIOUSLY ADVANCED FOR PURCHASE OF PROJECT SITE [4/5ths Vnte Requiredl Juan Arroyo, Housing Coordinator, stated it was essential for the Council/Agency to take action due to an established deadline to submit the proposal tbr a tax credit financing requirement by 5/28/96. The prqiect had received wide spread community support. * Chris Moxon, 315 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, South Bay Community Services, stated there was a need tbr large units for families, He requested Agency/Council support. ,' Ken Sauder, 315 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, Community Development Director for South Bay Community Services, requested Agency/Council support. * Barbara A. Worth, 1260 Third Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, South Bay Community Services, stated the city Housing Commission supported the project. * M itch Thompson, 5110 Glen Verde Drive, Bonita, CA, Bank of America Community Development Bank, stated they were the proposed construction and pernlanent lender. He requested Agency/Council support. Memher Rindone commended SBCS tbr their work in the cnmmunity, but expressed concern abuut the stalling of thc Agency. The City of San Diego had tied in a new condition, i.e. job or vocatinnM training. }te questioned it' there was a linkage between education/training and low income housing in the city. David Gustafson, Assistant Director of Community Development, responded that Park Village Apartments had an employment/counseling assistance component. Casa Nueva Vida had a component that provided educational training for .job searches. He felt SBCS would positively respond to include that in the proposed prqiect. Member Rindone questioned how it was monitored. Mr. Gustafson responded that city staff monitored the Park Village Apartments prqiect. Mr. Sander stated SBCS had the personnel to handle the project. There was a time with all prqjects when everything came together and they were able to take on another pmiect. They monitored their time very carethlly. They had a case worker to help identif~ needs of the residents of Casa Nueva Vida. They were also wnrking on Minutes May 21, 1996 Page 3 another proposal where they would be working with a consortium of agencies which would include job training for victims of domestic violence. They were very concerned in not only providing housing and shelter but services as needed for the total development of the person. Member Rindone stated he was pleased to hear the services being oft~red by SBCS. He requested that staff summarize what was being done regarding the linkage between housing and training. He also wanted to see everyone with housing projects brought in with the trainers and networking groups. RESOLUTIONS 18310, 1498, AND 18311 OFFERED BY MEMBER RINDONE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. 8.A RESOLUTION 1499 APPROVING RATIFICATION OF A $378,280 COMMITMENT FROM THE LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING FUND FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED IN RANCHO DEL REY SPA III--Amendment to the Cordova housing agreements to enhance the project's competitiveness in the next tax credit application cycle. All conditions previously approved by Council/Agency remain valid and are not proposed to be changed. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. [4/5ths Vote Required on Item 9.B1 (Community Development Director) B. RESOLUTION 1500 APPROVING A COMMITMENT FOR $100,000 FROM THE LOW/MODERATE INCOME HOUSING FUNDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED IN RANCHO DEL REY SPA 111 [4/51hs Vote Required on this iteral C. RESOLUTION 18312 APPROVING RATIFICATION OF A LAND DONATION AND A $160,000 COMMITMENT FROM HOME PROGRAM FUNDS FOR AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED IN RANCHO DEL REY SPA ill D. RESOLUTION 18313 APPROVING [1] AN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS WITH RANCHO DEL REY INVESTORS; [2] AN AMENDED AND RESTATED ASSIGNMENT OF CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS WITH CORDOVA VENTURES; [3] AN AMENDED AND RESTATED LOW INCOME HOUSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN RANCIlO DEL REY INVESTORS AND CORDOVA VENTURES ALL WITH RESPECT TO 2.97 ACRES OF PROPERTY WITHIN SPA III PROPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT INTO A 40 UNIT LOW INCOME HOUSING COMPLEX; AND [4] AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE AMENDED AND RESTATED CONVEYANCE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS AND THE AMENDED AND RESTATED ASSIGNMENT OF CONVEYANCE AGREEI~ENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS E. RESOLUTION 18314 APPROVING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT WITH RANCHO DEL REY INVESTORS, L.P. Member Moot stated he would abstain l¥om participation in order to avoid a contlict of interest Juan Arroyo, Housing Coordinator, gave a brief history of the prc~iect. Stal'f and Rancho del Rey were in disagreement regarding the affordable housing delivery schedule. Rancho del Rey l~lt they should be relieved of the cap on market rate unit approval until the affordable units were delivered. They were unwilling to participate in the proposed Cordova project resubmittal unless relieved of the city mandated cap. Staff recommended keeping the cap on market rate units in place at the present time and revisiting the issue once staff learned whether the tax credit application succeeded. Staff would know il' tax credits were awarded by August 1996. Staff felt the application was more competitive at the present time and did not want to relinquish city leverage to ensure the affordable housing units were built. Council was being asked to make a policy decision on the matter. Local residents had been informed of the process. David Gustafson, Assistant Director of Community Development, stated between the present time and August 1996 when the tax credit comnfittee decided on whether the prc~iect was funded, staff would work with Rancho del Rey and all other potential participants to develop alternative p~qiects if Cordova did not get a tax credit award. Staff wanted back-up positions that they could act on quickly. If the state committee awarded the preliminary credits to Minutes May 21, 1996 Page 4 the project and if Rancho del Rey was progressing with due diligence, staff would recommend that the Agency/Council suspend the cap on the maps for the market units that Rancho del Rey wanted to pursue. If the state comrmttee did not award the credits, staff would recommend that they return to Council the first week in September with a reconsideration of Rancho del Rey's request to be relieved of the cap. Staff wanted to be as flexible as possible while still keeping Rancho del Rey a committed and participating member to provide the affordable housing in Rancho del Rey. ~ Chris Moxon, 315 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, South Bay Community Services, stated they supported the pro. iect and noted the need in the eastern area of the city. * Craig Fukuyama, 2727 Hoover, National City, CA, Ranch del Rey Investors Lin'fited, stated he wanted to conmut and reaffirm their support for the Cordova project. His remarks were focused on the issue on Item E, Rancho del Rey's affordable housing agreement. In fulfillment of their obligation the partnership had pledged to donate nearly $1 ~nillion in property for the 40 units of which their obligatkm was only 23 units. They were reimbursing the city's affordable housing program an additional $238,000. They had completed development of the site and recorded the parcel map and had spent in excess of $25,000 preparing the conveyance agreements, two modifications, and amendments before the Agency/Council. In addition, they had granted the city an $805,000 deed of trust on the Cordova site securing their affordable housing obligation. The city was not without some leverage over the Ranch del Rey Partnership to fi~lfill it's obligation. He felt the "leverage" referred to by staff was effectively a city imposed moratorium on Rancho del Rey. The leverage was punitive and not an inducement or incentive to comply with the city requirements. They could not commit to the Cordova project again without being relieved of the moratorium. Even with financial enhancements Cordova's success was uncertain and they could not seriously pursue alternatives while legally comXmtted to the Cordova project. Other non-profits were not willing to commit or engage in serious negotiations while the likelihood of a successful outcome regarding the Cordova prQjeet hung over them. Holding them financially hostage was unreasonable and excessive. They could not accept the terms in the staff's most recent revisions to the agreement. They desired an affirmative statement in the agreement that stated "At the end of the period tbr the tax credit (around September 15, 1996) the final map cap would be terminated or lifted.' He requested approval of Exhibit F which was their version of the agreement. Mr. Gustal~on responded that if stall's language was added to Section 2 or' the document, it would be the staff recommendation. If it was left the way it was in the Agency/Conncil packet it would reflect Mr. Fukuyama's request. Chair/Mayor Horton stated that Rancho del Rey had done tremendous things for the community and she wanted to work out a resolution. She supported Mr. Fukuyama's requested because it did not jeopardize the city's goal. Member Rindone stated there were conflicting interests between a respected company and protecting the city's interests. It was his understanding that during the period of time, i.e. until September, if the cap was terminated the prQlection was approximately 400 additional units to be processed. Mr. Fukuyama stated the subdivision map would be bet~)re Council in July/August fi>r approximately 400 lots which he t~lt would be the final tentative subdivision map lbr Rancho del Rey. They were currently negotiating a pr(~ject that abutted the affordable housing site that could conceivably be a condominium project lbr about 200 more units. They were reluctant to negotiate because of the pending Cordova action and the possibility that there was a final map limit in place. Member Rindone stated felt the prolx~sal was reasonable and quastioned what the downside was fi)r the city. Mr. Gustat~son responded that there were two concerns: 1) staff wanted Rancho del Rey to continue to be comrmtted tu thc project and the caps had been placed at the mid-point o~' the project so that when they reached the end of the pr{~iect they would have affordable housing and not have to make compromises that the city would not normally make; 2) the setting of a precedent, if Council did remove the cap he recommended that it be put on the record that it was extraordinary circumstances, i.e. Rancho del Rey had made an extraordinary effi~rt to make it happen, but had been held captive by a tax credit process beyond their control. Staff had searched tbr alternatives and had not fonnd any. The city had security on the site but it was not sufficient to ensure that the affi>rdable housing nnits would be built. Minutes May 21, 1996 Page 5 Member Padilla agreed that an incremental lifting of the cap would be impractical· The city had dealt extensively with the developer over the years and t~lt there was a good faith situation. He understood the incompleteness in terms of the value on the deed of trust, but i'~lt the willingness was significant and should be taken into consideration. He felt the Agency/Council should move lbrward with Mr. Fukuyama's recommendation. · Ken Sauder, 315 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA, Community Development Director for South Bay Community Services, stated there was a tremendous need for aftbrdable housing on the East side of 1-805, particularly in the Rancho del Rey area. They enjoyed working with McMillin Company and Rancho del Rey. He requested Agency/Council support of the project. ·Mitch Thompson, 5110 Glen Verde Drive, Bonita, CA, Bank of America, felt the project would be a positive attribute for the community. He requested Agency/Council support of the project. Member Alevy stated he had concerns with the project. When the item was previously before the Agency/Council he was the no vote. The education process that had been conducted evidently worked because there was no one present in opposition to the project. It was unfortunate that more people were not given an opportunity to buy a home the first time. The co-op program for the trolley project was admirable and he questioned the possibility for such a program for the Cordova project. There was a real difference in pride in ownership ti'om pride in rentership. Mr. Sauder responded that they could look at such a co-op· When the tax credit period of 15 years ran out the residents could organize in some way regarding purchase· South Bay Community Services was not just looking at putting roofs over people's heads but helping them meet all their needs. Member Alevy stated he lived beyond the 300 ft. area, but within the 2,500 ft. area and had been assured that it would have little, if any, effect on the value of his home. The city should be very proud of the quality of the affordable housing in the city and the tact that the city was way ahead uf the threshold of the rest of the county and region· The project abutted to an existing neighborhood which did not lhtl under the disclosure requirement when · they purchased their homes. The city needed to give the neighborhood every opportunity to give input and be educated regarding projects in order to lessen the impacts. The developer had gone way beyond the norm to make the eastern part of the city a wonderfully planned conununity. He supported Mr. Fukuyama's request as they had made a sincere effort. He did not want government to stand in thc way of progress. Member Rindone l'~lt it was a unique situation and did not set a precedent. The community interest was best served when there was a responsible developer that provided the jobs, opportunities, and advancements which impacted the economy of the city. He believed McMillin's commitment· RESOLUTION 18314, EXHIBIT F, OFFERED BY MEMBER RINDONE, reading nf the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-0-1 with Mnot abstaining. RESOLUTIONS 1499, 1500, 18312, AND 18313 OFFERED BY CIIAIR/MAYOR HORTON, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-0-1 with Mm~t abstaining. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR None OTIIER BIISINESS 9. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) - None 10. CItAIR'S/MAYOR'S REPORT(S) - None 11. AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS - None Minutes May 21, 1996 Page 6 ADJOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT AT 10:47 P.M. to the Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting on June 4, 1996 at 4:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC/AAE, City Clerk By: Vicki C. Soderquist, CMC~uty City Clerk