HomeMy WebLinkAboutrda min 1993/03/16 CC MINUTES OF A SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Tuesday, March 16, 1993 Council Chambers
8:11 p.m. Public Services Building
PRESENT: Members/Councilmembers Fox, Moore, Rindone, and Chnirm~n/Mayor Nader
ABSENT: Membcr/Councilmember Hot-ton
ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, Executive Director; Brace M. Boogeard, Agency General Counsel; Cluis
Salomone, Executive Secretary; and Berlin D. Bosworth, Secretary to the Redevelopment
Agency
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None Submitted.
Items 3 through 6)
CONSENT CALENDAR O¥1eERED BY MEMBER/COUNCILMEMBER RINDONE, with the change to
Item 5, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-1, with Horton absent.
3. A. COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 17036 AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBER 16838 BY ADOPTING
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMML~SION'S 1/15/93 ACTIONS ON THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM RESUBM]TrAL NUMBER 8 AND ACCEPTING AND INCORPORATING
MODIFICATIONS TO THE LAND USE PLAN AND THE GENERAL PLAN, LAND USE ELEMENT,
LAND USE CIRCULATION PROGRAM, PARKS AND RECREATION ELEMENT, AND BAYFRONT
AREA PLAN -- On 10/13/92 the City Council approved and adopted the Chula Vista Local Coastal Program
Resubmittal (LCP No. 8) and corresponding General Plan Amendment based upon the Bayfront Plannlnoo
Subcommittee's Alternative Plan. LCP No. 8 was submitted to Coastal Commission staff for review and docketing
before the California Coastal Commission (CCC). On 1/15/93 the CCC adopted LCP No. 8 with minor
modifications acceptable to City staff and consultants. Pursuant to State Coastal Act, the City Council is now
requested to adopt and authorize the CCC actions on LCP No. 8 to the Land Use Plan and Specific Plan by
amending Resolution 16838 and Ordinance 2~32. Staff recommends approval of the resolution and placing the
ordln~nce on first reading. (Com~nunity Development Director)
B. COUNCIL
~ AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 2532 OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA BY ADOPTING CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION'S 1/H;193 ACTIONS ON THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM RESUBMITTAL NUMBER 8 AND ACCEPTING AND
INCORPORATING MODI~CATIONS TO THE SPECI~C PLAN (first reading)
4. A. COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 17037 APPROVING PROPOSED BUDGET AND AC CEPTING ACHIEVEMENT
REPORT FOR THE DOWNTOWN IMPROVI~MENT DISTRICT -- Chapter 2,22 of the Chula Vista Municipal
Code requires the Downtown Business Association (DBA) to submit an annual Budget for each calendar year. It
is recommended that Council adopt the resolution approving the DBA's proposed 1993 operating t~udget and accept
the Redevelopment Agency staff report of the Town Manager's DBA'$ activities and progress. (Community
Development Director/Director of Finance)
MINUTES
March 16, 1993
Page 2
B. AGENCY
REPORT ANNUAL REPORT TO THE AGENCY
Mary Coburu, Town Manager for the Downtown Business Association (DBA), 360 Third Avenue, C'hula Vista,
91910, presented a brief report on current activities undertaken by the DBA--[1] publish a business vacancy hot
sheet distribu~l through the realtors association on a monthly basis for three months to generate interest in filling
up existing vacancies downtown; [2] the weekend of March 19-20, 1993 in conjunction with the Hispanic Arts
Festival at Memorial Park, a sidewalk sale as well as ente~inment on Third Avenue; [3] recently instigated a
Second-Wednasday morning of the Month Clean Up, last Wednesday graffiti was cleaned off of the Weider
Building; [4] the DBA would be hosting a Downtown Showcase at the Chamber Mixer on April 22, 1993.
Chairman/Mayor Nader expanded on one point--the Price Club Hispanic Arts Festival being held at Memorial Park.
The 'kick-off' event was at 10:00 on Friday, March 19 and throughout the day on Friday and Saturday a variety
of cultural events, all of which were related to Hispanic contributions to the arts, had been planned. He urged as
many citizens as possible to attend.
5. AGENCY
RESOLUTION 1308 REAPPROPRIATING FUNDS FROM C.LP. ACCOUNT BF37 (LANDIS
AVENUE PARKING LOT EXTENSION) TO C.I.P. ACCOUNT RDll8 (PARKING STRUCTURE
REPAIRS) -- The brick veneer on the Town Centre parking structure is failing, and to eliminate an unsafe situation
and the related liability it needs to be removed. To accomplish the removal, a demolition contract was placed out
to bid and a proposal for structural overseeing and analysis, end design restoration was solicited. The contract
amount for the work is under $25,000; however, the CIP project account for the parking structure has a balance
of $5,189. Therefore, additional funds need to be appropriated to undertake the recommended work. Staff
recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Director) [4/5th$ Vote Required]
Member/Councilmember Rindone questioned staff regarding page 5-3 of the staff report, noting that the demolition
contract was $13,963 which was the second lower responsible bidder, and should read $13,860, and would change
the total demolition to $15,246 end the total of both contracts should read $26,125.
Mr. Salomona agreed that was a transposition of numbers end agreed to correct the numbers.
6. A. COUNCIL/
B. AGENCY
REPORT THREE-PARTY AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND CHULA VISTA BAYFRONT CONSERVANCY TRUST (BCT)
FOR A LEASE, LOAN, AND OPERATING AGREEMENT FOR THE CHULA VISTA NATURE
INTERPRETIVE CENTER (NIC) -- On 6/30/92, Council directed staff to prepare a new Lease, Loan, and
Operating Agreement with the BCT for the NIC and froze six months of the NIC's FY 1992-93 budget. Council
considered a progress report at its 12/8/92 meeting and unfroze one-quarter of the BCT's budget to provide funding
through 3/31/93. Staff recommends that the Council end Agency: (1) accept the report and approve in concept
the terms of the draft Lease, Loan, and Operating Agreement for the NIC; and (2) recommends that Council lift
the freeze on the BCT/NIC budget. Staff recommends acceptance of the report. (Deputy City Manager Thomson)
END CONSENT CALENDAR
PI, JBLI~ HEARINGS
None submitted.
MINUTES
March 16, 1993
Page 3
ORAL COMMUNICATION~
None.
7. AGENCY
~OJa~[~l~]~L~ APPROVING THE REVISED ROLES AND FUNCTIONS FOR THE
TOWN CENTRE, OTAY VALLEY AND SOUTHWEST PROJECT AREA COMMITTEES, AND
INCORPORATING SAME INTO THE NEXT ITERATION OF THE RESPECTIVE REDEVELOPMENT
PLANS - At the 10/6/92 City Council meeting, Council authorized one or two members of the Council to meet
with the Town Centre, Oily Valley, and Southwest Project Area Committees and the Montgomery planning
Committee to formulate a consensus on streamlining the City's development review process in order to create a
more 'user friendly" environment for business development. The revised roles and functions of the PACs are being
submitted for review and action by the City Council. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Community
Development Director)
Chairman/Mayor Nader asked staff about a potential area of conflict between the resolution before the Agency and
an ordinance staff would be bringing forward on community planning committees as contained in a memorandum
he received from staff, and he sought clarification.
Principal Community Development Specialist Lyle Haynes noted that staff was currently working on Economic
Development Commission Recommendation 17, which required the review of commuulty p]annlng committee~ and
analyzed a potential merger of the Montgomery Pl~nnlng Committee with the Southwest Project Area Committee
(PAC). That merger was not part of the item before the Agency. He explained the pu~ose of the memorandum
was to keep the Agency apprised of that process and advised that the draft language conflicted with the proposed
role and function of the Southwest Project Area Committee as contained in staff's report for the item.
Chairman/Mayor Neder asked what was in the resolution before the Agency that would be in conflict with
something staff would be bringing forward at a later date.
Mr. Haynes replied that nothing was in conflict.
Member/Councilmember Moore silted that staff worked exceptionally well with him and the various committees
in the Mayor's absence and would ask to trail the item for one week had he not had an opportunity to review the
item.
Chairman/Mayor Neder silted he had reviewed the item. He asked if the three Project Area Committees had
reviewed the item.
Member/Councilmember Moore responded that two Committees--Town Centre and Oily-had not seen the resolution
but had reviewed the policies reflected in the resolution and had agreed to them. The Southwest PAC agreed in
concept some time ago but had not had a quorum for recent meetings.
Chairman/Mayor Neder noted that staff's report reflected that the three PACs had conceptually approved the policies
reflected in the resolution, and that it was the responsibility of the City Attorney to see that the resolution actually
implemented those polices end trusted that that job had been properly performed, and that he felt comfortable in
moving forward with the item with the understanding the PACs had an opportunity lo review tho policies r0flected
and approve of those.
MSC [Moore/Fox] to approve recommendation l-A, l-B, and 1-C on page 7-11 of the staff report, tiffed
and Function of Project Area Committees", that the bylaws-numbec 4 on page 7-12-..of each of these three
MINUTES
March 16, 1993
Page 4
PACs will be deleted, and the key dements are either in the Commission Handbook or will be put in the
Commission Handbook upon the next reprinting, and amend the resolution to reflect these.
Agency General Counsel pointed out that he believed the appropriate place to regulate the PACs would be in the
Redevelopment Area Plans, not necessarily in the bylaws or Commission Handbook.
Mernber/Councilrnernber Moore reiterated he was recommending doing away with bylaws.
Chairman/Mayor Nader asked the General Counsel if there was a State requirement that the PACs adopt bylaws
independently of the Redevelopment Agency.
General Counsel Boogeard replied that the proposal affected them aP, er their State life expired.
Mernber/Councilrnember Moore explained that two of the PAC. s were no longer State-mandated and the other PAC's
State-mandate would expire December 1993 and that any reference to being State-mandated contained in their
current bylaws need to be deleted.
Chairman/Mayor Nader noted that Member/Councilman Moore's point on bylaws was well taken. He noted
commissions did not have the authority to adopt their own bylaws, apparently unaware of the fact that only the City
Council had that authority. He asked about the recommendation change on bottorn of page 7-2 and top of page 7-3
of staff report which apparently occun'ed after the PACs had looked at the recommendations relative to the fiscal
review authority. He stated it was his understanding that what staff was recommending would not precluae a PAC
upon receiving, and doing its own review of a fiscal report, from making recommendations to the Agency.
Mernber/Councilrnember Moore interjected that he thought it should be included in the recommendation; staff
proposed, that the PACs would be provided the annual report prior to its submission to the Agency and would not
need to be placed in writing in the organizational set-up.
Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he had no problem with that as long as it was understood that in the process of the
annual report coming to the Agency, the PAC would have the right and ability to make any comments or
recommendations directly to the Agency.
Chairman/Mayor Nader said another question he had concerned the handling of variances, staff report page 3. He
stated he had concern with variances coming directly to the Agency and not to the PAC.
Mr. Salomone replied that the intent was to expedite the process for the applicant and not to reduce the buffer from
the Council and staff perceived that as the direction of the Economic Development Commission's (EDC)
recommendation for permit streamlining. He noted that variances were of~n very minor and did cause nuisance
delay for the applicant.
Mernber/Councilmernber Moore noted that staff did say that the exception would be a project which required
discretionary land use approval and that key variances would go through the PACs.
Mr. Salornone stated that was correct.
Chairman/Mayor Nader offered two suggestions to clarify or modify that recommendation, one would be that the
applicant should have the option of going to the PAC if he/she felt it would strengthen their case and, secondly,
even if that option were not exercised, the PAC should at least be notified of such an item coming to the Agency
and be given the opportunity to make a recommendation to the Agency if they chose to. The intent was that they
not hold a full-fledged public hearing, but rather, that the Agency could receive a recommendation.
Mernber/Councilrnember Moore replied that he agreed with the s*aff recommendation as it was stated.
MINUTES
March 16, 1993
Page 5
Mr. Salomone interjected that the recomw, endation came out of the EDC Streamlining Subcommittee which thought
it was one area where the City could be very efficient and therefore staff supported it, with there being very rare
instances where a variance would be a controversial issue.
Chairman/Mayor Nader asked if it were not correct that if it were not a controversial issues it would not be
appealed to the Agency anyway.
Mr. Salomone said that was correct.
Chairman/Mayor Nader asked if the particular recommendation was put before the PACs.
Mr. Haynes regponded that was correct.
Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he could support the motion if it wes understood that, at the very lease, the PAC
would receive notification when an item is on the Agency's agenda for a variance and would have an opportunity
to comment on it either individually or collectively.
Mr. Salomone stated the amendments would be incorporated into the Redevelopment Plans and brought hack to the
Agency.
Chairman/Mayor asked if more specific language would be coming back to the Agency before these
recommendations were implemented.
Mr. Salomone replied that the recommendations would be implemented immediately but that staff would come back
with revised Redevelopment Plans.
Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he was seeking clarification of what the Agency was implementing.
Mr. Salomone said that what the Agency was implementing was exactly what was shown on staff report page 7-3
regarding variances, and that they would not review variances unless they were a part of a larger plan.
Chairman/Mayor Nader said that that statement could mean different things and what he was seeking to clarify.
He wanted to know if that meant they would not conduct a public hearing, or they would not be the authority on
the variance, or that a review would not be required before the Agency made its decision. He stated he could
support those meanings. He further stated that the statement could mean they did not have a fight to comment on
the variance or that they would not be notified before the variance can~ before the Agency, and that he could not
support.
Mr. Salomone said not the latter at all. If fact, if any PAC wanted to see a variance and requested it, staff would
tacke it before them.
Member/Councilmember asked ifa motion had to be made to approve each of the roles and function statements of
each of the PACs.
General Counsel Boogaard replied that was correct, and that Resolution 1309 contained Exhibit A-l, A-2, and A-3
which are being incorporated by reference.
Motion passes 4-0-1, with Horton absent.
Member/Couucilmember Moore asked if the Redevelopment Plans had to be updated or could those go into effect
immediately with an addendum to the Plans.
MINUTES
March 16, 1993
Page 6
General Counsel Boogaard stated it was ins recommendation, as the PACs were controlled through the
Redevelopment Plans themselves, and not by the resolution, there might be conflicting legislation without amending
the Plans to make them consistent with that action. The governing authority would be placed in the Plans
themselves. The PACs were created by the Redevelopment Plans and not by resolution or ordinance, and therefore,
did not otherwise exist except by the Plans themselves. The actions (policy) contained in Resolution 1309 would
become effective immediately and the paperwork, incorporation into the Plans, would follow as soon as possible.
RESOLUTION 1309 OI~'ERED BY MEMBER/COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, reading of the text was
waived, passed and approved 4-0-I, with Horton absent.
ITEMS P~'LLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
None.
OTHER BUSINESS
8. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
· Executive Director Goss apprised the Agency that the Governor's Commission on a Southern California
Veterans Home would be meeting on March 25, 1993 at 9:00 a.m. nt the Fleet Reserve Association
Branch 289,659 Silver Stand Boulevard, Imperial Beach and then they would tour the Lower Sweetwater
Site later in the morning. _
9. CHAIRMAN'S/MAYOR'S REPORT - None.
10. MEMBERS'/COUNCILMEMBERS COMMENTS
· Member/Councilmember Moore mentioned that there had been discussion about the property owner and City
working together to do somethin~ with the combined land that would be advantageous to the City's recreational
program.
· Member/Councilmember Moore pointed out that for a land use project to pass through the Project Area
Committee first, then on to the Resource Conservation Committee secondly, and then third, to Design and Review
and then possibly to the Planning Commission prior to coming before the Agency would take approximately 60 to
65 days.
· Member/Cooncilmember Rindone addressed the staff memorandum m response to Referral 2723. He
pointed out that he was concerned because it was a particular referral that was to provide a delineation of the roles
and interrelationships of the Economic Development Commission, the Bn~ioegg Response Team, Employment
Development Team, and the new Partnership Council. He stated he did not see mention of the. Career Awareness
Center and the representation that it offered the commtmity because it was a unique concept that is well respited
and that the Private Industry Council was trying to replicate it in other communities. He mentioned that the Career
Awareness Center did provide immediate assessment, referral for job training, representation and the Agency should
request staff to visit the facility. Additionally, he stated that the Del Rey Center facility provided job training
programs had not been focused on and that the Agency should include staff on a field trip to become apprised of
the facility. He noted that the City had some of the best job training and career one-stop assessment centers in the
entire County and that had not been noted by staff.
MINUTES
March 16, 1993
Page 7
· Member/Councilmember Rindone asked that the Agency endorse Chula Vista representation on the San
Diego Consortium of P~ivate Industry Council. Fie offered a staff referral that the City Manager's Office check
to ascertain when nominations were due to serve on the Private Industry Council, to apprise the Mayor's Office
when nominations were available, and then have citizens from the community be nominated.
MSC [Rindone/Nader] that the City Manager's Office check to ascertain when nominations are due to serve
on the Private Industry Council, to apprise the Mayor's Office when nominations are available, and then have
citizens from our community submit applications to serve, approved 40-1, with Hurton absent.
ttttt
~,D~J0URNMENT
The Redevelopment Agency met in closed session at 8:57 p.m. to discuss the acquisition of property at 4705 Otay
Valley Road (Jimmie & Judi Shinohara, owners), pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8.
ADJOURNMENT AT 9:55 P.M. to an adjourned and special meeting of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency
on Tuesday, March 23, 1993 at 6:00 p.m., in Council Chambers, Public Services Building.
Respectfully Submitted,
Berlin D. Bosworth, Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency
[C :\WP51 \AGENCY~MINUTES\03-16-93 .MIN]