Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1988/09/13 Item 04 ~~. -. ... .. " ... .. ~. COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE: I tern 4 Meeting Date 9/13/88 Resolution No.)37fl Authorizing a Double Escrow for the Purchase/Resale of the Terra Nova School Site Deputy City Mana. ger tMOrri s <: ~ m/ W\~i\ cJ City Manage':jA ~.:-:,.(, (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No~) SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: In May 1988, the City Council authorized staff to purchase a declared surplus school site from the Sweetwater Union High School District (Dlstrict), consisting of 26.27 acres and located on Hidden Vista Drive at Ridgeback Road (Lot D of Chula Vista Tract No. 80-15), commonly referred to as Terra Nova. Specifically, the City Council authorized staff to purchase/resell the property through a double escrow and to return proceeds in excess of the original $2.25 million purchase price to the District. The approval was based on staff1s recommendation that the City could achieve expansion of Terra Nova park, pl us specifi c park improvements, through thi s process. Bi ddi ng for the property has been compl eted and staff and the City Counci 1 subcommittee are recommending that the City enter into a double escrow with the District and Woodcrest Development to complete this transaction. RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the resolution authorizing s ta ff to: · 1) Enter into a double escrow with Sweetwater Union High School District for the purchase/resale of a surplus school site comprised of 26.27 acres; . ." 4 .- . . .. . 2) Award the bi d, and to resell the subject property, to Woodcrest Development for $5,907,000 plus specified park improvements; 3) Convey all monies received by the City, in excess of the original purchase price, less stipulated processing and staff costs and $30,000 for additi onal park improvements, to the Sweetwater Uni on Hi gh School District; and 4) Specify in the escrow instructions the City's understanding that those funds conveyed to the District, in excess of the $2.25 mill ion purchase pri ce, wi 11 be used for the Admi ni strati ve Center/ joi nt use Corporati on Yard. 5) Specify in the escrow instructions and as a condition of the final map that Woodcrest implement a grading/construction plan which provides access to a majority of the upper ballfield and facilities during construction. SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: At its August 2, 1988 meeting, the City Council took action to refer this issue to a Council subcommittee comprised of Counci1members Malcolm and McCandliss. The subcommittee, after reviewing the ... .It ""<( .... - .. , ,. .. ~. .. . "" ., ~ .~ . .. .. ~ 'Y Page 2, Item 4 Meeting Date 9/13/88 various proposals received by the City for the purchase of Terra Nova, met with staff on August 19 to discuss their overall findings. The subcommittee concurred with the original staff recommendation to award Woodcrest as the successful bidder. However, it did request that Woodcrest modify its proposal to insure access to a majority of the upper park throughout construction. As originally proposed, Woodcrest would regrade the entire park, lowering it approximately 9 feet and not allow access, with the exception of a tot lot, duri ng the course of constructi on. Thi s avoi ded the purchase of fi 11 and allowed the project to be balanced on site. As other hardscape facilities, such as tennis courts, were completed they would also be opened to the public. Under the original proposal, turfed areas would have remained closed to the public for approximately 6-12 months. In comp 1 i ance wi th the subcommi ttee proposal Woodcres t submi tted a rev i sed proposal to add a "sliver fill" requiring approximately 70,700 cubic yards of import di rt to the northern end of the exi sti ng park. Al though the revi sed plan reduces the increased usable acres from 2.7 to approximately 2.5 acres, it enables Woodcrest to avoid lowering the entire park, thus leaving a greater portion of the park undisturbed and open to the public. Although Woodcrest proposes to import approximately 70,700 cubic yards of dirt, this plan revision in no way reduces the proposed park amenities submitted in the original Woodcrest proposal (see Attachment 1 for location of the fill). Woodcrest estimates that the cost of the import fill is approximately $393,000, including additional processing, engineering and grading costs. As a result, Woodcrest has modified its original bid of $6.3 million to $5,907,000 to compensate for these addi ti ona 1 expenses. The Counc i 1 subcommittee was aware that the import of fi 11 woul d necessitate a price change and recommends that the Woodcrest proposal be approved by the full City Council. DISCUSSION: As approved by the City Council, staff submitted an offer to the Sweetwater District for the purchase of the Terra Nova school site, in the amount of $2,250,000 (please see Attachment "A"). It was the City's intent in making thi s purchase to address specific park expansi on/enhancement needs for the existing City park (Terra Nova Park) located adjacent to the Terra Nova school site. The City's offer to purchase was subject to the following conditions: That the City be authorized to rebid the entire parcel prior to close of escrow, requesting bidders to address in their proposals park expansion/enhancement and site development issues, and purchase price; That the District Board approve the use of a double escrow to accompl ish the proposed transacti on, wi th proceeds from the second escrow (between the City and the successful bidder) to be used to pay the proposed purchase price, escrow fees and any processing costs for the Terra Nova parcel; '.?.7~1 '" ~.. .. . Page 3, Item 4 Meeting Date 9/13/88 That proceeds exceeding the original $2.25 mill ion purchase price woul d be transferred to the Di stri ct, 1 ess processi ng/ admi ni strati ve costs plus other costs for minor park improvements not covered in the park expansion agreement, which later are not to exceed $30,000; and That it was the City's intent that this transfer will facilitate the constructi on of the new Di stri ct admi ni strati ve offi ces and/or the . proposed joint City/District corporation yard. According to District staff, the Sweetwater Board approved the City's proposal . to purchase real property at its June 9, 1988 meeting. + ,. .. ~ ~. .. .. + . ',~ .. '. -I Bidding Procedure On June 14, 1988, the City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the resale of the Terra Nova site. The RFP stipulated that the City would evaluate bids based upon three major criteria including: . site desi gn . park enhancement/expansion proposals . purchase price Specifically, the RFP required bidders to submit preliminary subdivision site and grading plans, preliminary park plans and a minimum bid of $2.8 million. For Council's information, the RFP in no way granted vested development rights, waived City fees or the City's subdivision review process. If Council approves Woodcrest Development as the successful bidder, they will be required to comply with all subdivision review procedures. Further, the RFP clearly stated that al though the purchase price was part of the evaluation criteria, the City would not base its final selection on price alone, but rather would select the successful bidder based upon all of those components listed above. As addi ti onal i nformati on to bi dders, the RFP al so i ncl uded a prel imi nary engineering assessment of the Terra Nova site. The study was commissioned by the City in conjunction with efforts for the possible relocation of a church site to this property. The consultant engineer reviewed three alternate site proposals including: Proposal A: Proposal B: Residential - proposed construction of 103 lots. Residential/Park proposed expanding the park by approximately 13 acres and constructi ng 52 lots on approximately 13.5 acres. Residential/Church/Park - proposed 43 lots on 12.6 acres, an 8.5 acre church site and a 5.6 acre park expansion. Proposal C: Although none of these proposals were implemented, it did provide the City wi th a pre 1 i mi nary economi c assessment of three development a 1 terna ti ves for the site (please see Attachment "B"). I ~l8' I '.. . :~. of . .. .. + ~ ~ ., ~. . ~ ~ -+ . . .. 1 ~. 2 -I ~ -. Page 4, Item 4 Meeting Date 9/13/88 Bid Submittals and Evaluation Approximately 50 documents were distributed to interested parties and bidding was closed on July 15, 1988. Fourteen proposals were received from eight bidders and accepted by the City. One bid, which missed the 1 :00 p.m. deadline for submittal of bids, was not accepted. As part of the RFP process, a bidders' conference was held at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, June 21, 1988 in the Chula Vista City Council Chambers. Thirty one bidders and/or their representatives attended the conference and were given an overvi ew of the RFP. Representati ves from Pl anni ng, Engi neeri ng, Parks and Recreation, Fire and Administration were present to respond to questions. Subsequent to the bidders' conference, numerous individual meetings were held with bidders to address their specific proposals and/or questions regarding the development components of the RFP. Official proposals ran a broad spectrum. Proposed purchase prices ranged from the minimum bid of $2.8 million to a high bid of $6.3 million. The proposed number of lots per development ranged from a low of 70 lots (with a proposed density of 3.8 dwelling units per acre)l to a high of 94 lots (with a proposed density of 3.7 dwelling units per acre). The typical number of lots ranged from 74 to 86 lots. Proposed parkland transfers to the City ranged from 0 to 8 acres. And, with the exception of one bidder all proposals i ncl uded a pump sewer system (pl ease see Attachment lie" for a summary of the pertinent bid data from each developer). A selection committee, comprised of the Directors of Parks and Recreation, Planning and Public Works, Deputy City Manager Morris, and Mr. Andrew Campbell, Administrator of Planning for the Sweetwater Union High School District, was formed to review and prioritize the bids. The review process included an independent evaluation of each of the 14 proposals submitted. Using a 10 point scale for each of the evaluation criteria, the committee selected the following as its top three choices: Bid Amounts No. of Lots/ Gross Developer (Millions) Avg. Lot Size Park Add DU/AC Sewer 1 ) Woodcrest - A $6.3 86 10ts/12,570 sf 1.82 3.46 Pump 2 ) Woodcrest - B $5.51 76 10ts/14,200 sf 1.82 3.13 Pump 3) J.M. Peters - B $5. 111 74 1 ots/7 ,650 sf 2.3 3.09 Pump ------------------------------------ For Council's information, the high density on this project, when compared to the proposed 95 lot subdivision at 3.7 dwelling units per acre, was the result of an 8 acre park contribution and an 18.27 subdivision site. Most park acreage donated to the City was in the range of 1.5 to 3 acres. Although 1.8 gross acres is being added to Terra Nova Park, regrading proposed by the developer will result in a net increase of 2.5 usable acres as calculated by Woodcrest's engineer and based upon the revised grading plan requested by the Council subcommittee. I~,')(I '. " ~~. ~ ~ .. ,., .; ~ .., ., ~. .. ~ ~ .., . . " .. .., 4 Page 5, Item 4 Meeting Date 9/13/88 Follow-up meetings and telephone conversations were conducted with J. M. Peters and Woodcrest to further cl arify the specifi c components of thei r proposal s. And, although Woodcrest Proposal A was unanimously chosen as the top bid, the only difference between Proposals "A" and liB II are price and density. Woodcrest's Proposal B includes the same site design, park layout and amenities. Hm'Jever, after substantial discussion, the 86 unit proposal was considered to be well Elanned, not overly dense, and would be compatible with existing residential. As an added bonus, it also provided more cash than other proposals. The Woodcrest Proposal Site Design: The Woodcrest site plan provides a very fine design for the 26.27 acre Terra Nova site. The proposed 86 lots and density of 3.46 dwelling units per acre is compatible with the R-l zoning in the surrounding area. The proposed lots, with an average size of 12,570 square feet, are well sited, terraced down from Ridgeback Road, and create vistas toward downtown San Diego and Coronado. The public street system is varied and curvilinear, and adds interest to the street scene. In addition, the Woodcrest plan was one of the few proposals which provided two access points to the subdivision. Although not mandated, and subject to the City's subdivision review process, it is preferable to the Fire Department and has the added advantages of avoiding overly long, dead-end cul-de-sacs, and facilitating neighborhood circulation. Park compatibility to the proposed subdivision is maximized by an adjacent internal street and interior parking access. This will help to avoid parking on Hidden Vista Road and the adjoining neighborhood streets. The site grading is treated in a sensitive fashion, with landscaped slopes at the exterior adjacent to and including Ridgeback Road, and the backup and side-on lot treatment on Ridgeback is preferable to any lot frontage alternative. Park Plan: The Woodcrest park design and expansion program was considered comprehensive and innovative in its approach to designing a facility that meets the recreational needs of new and existing residents, as well as correcting design flaws that presently exist in the park and have resulted in inconveniencing adjacent residents. The committee was impressed not only with the park design and compatibility with the proposed subdivision, as mentioned earlier, but also with the facilities being proposed. -------------------------- 3 At the request of the Counci 1 subcommi ttee, Pl anni ng staff compared the 3.46 DUlAC proposed density by Woodcrest with the comparable R-l areas in the adjacent developments (i.e., Beacon Court - gross 3.3 DUlAC, Woodhouse - gross 5.1 DUlAC, and Smokey Circle - gross 4.7 DUlAC) and found the density to be consistent with the existing projects. 131~ \ ,'0 :.. ~ .. . T ~ ~ . ~. of ~ .. , ~ .,. .. ~ ~ Page 6, Item 4 Meeting Date 9/13/88 Under the revised grading plan, the proposed park plan adds an additional 2.5 acres of usable park area in a configuration that lends itself to a much more efficient and attractive layout. Park facilities include a gazebo to house large community gatherings, a large open space for picnic areas including covered shade shelters and barbecue grills, a tot lot and interactive fountain, nightlighted tennis courts, ball fields, and soccer fields, as well as offstreet parking and a par course. Possibly the most impressive of these facilities was the tot lot which included three separate play areas and an interactive splash fountain (please see Attachment "0" for a comprehensive list of park improvements proposed by Woodcrest.) Engineering/Grading: Although the original grading plan from Woodcrest had certain advantages (i.e., to lower the park approximately 9 feet and balance the project on site requiring no import fill) the revised plan is also considered acceptable by the Engi neeri ng Department and the eva 1 uati on committee. These advantages include: the use of approximately 70,700 cubic yards of fill to raise a majority of the lower existing park pad to the same level as the upper park pad thus ensuring that a majority of the park remains open during construction. development of a terraci ng effect, gi vi ng an open, more spaci ous feeling to the neighborhood, as well as increasing the number of view homes. an efficient park layout with additional and improved recreational amenities for the community. Community Meeting Prior to bringing this proposal forward to the City Council, staff conducted a community meeting to inform local residents of the pending purchase and resale of the Terra Nova site. Approximately 570 residents were notified of a community meeting, which was held at 6:30 on August 3, 1988 in the McMillin Communi ty Room on East H Street. Approximately 55 resi dents attended the meeting. The most common comments made throughout the course of this meeting related to the community's opposition to nightlighted ball fields and the loss of the use of the park duri ng the gradi ng and constructi on phases of the Woodcrest subdivision. Specifically, the residents felt that nightlighting would encourage the use of a "neighborhood park" by organized baseball teams, thus creating excessive nighttime noise and traffic in the neighborhood. Notwithstanding the nighttime activities, residents also expressed concern that the lights themselves would have a negative impact. If the Woodcrest proposal is approved by the City Council, staff will continue to meet with the developer and the community in an attempt to reach an amicable solution on other issues of concern to the neighborhood. I<I~I .'- ~ ~.. -+ .,. .. ",' ~ ~ . r. ~ ~ >> .!- .. .. " -. Page 7, Item 4 Meeting Date 9/13/88 Notices were again sent to local residents in the Terra Nova area informing them that this item would be considered at tonight's meeting. Conveyance of Funds to the Sweetwater Union High School District As included in the Request to Purchase submitted by the City to the Sweetwater Union High School District, it is recommended that the City Council authorize staff to convey all funds in excess of the original $2.25 million purchase price, and less processing costs, staff costs, and $30,000 for unanticipated park improvements, to the Sweetwater Union High School District. Staff anticipates that the Woodcrest offer will exceed the original purchase price by approximately $3.6 million, less escrow and processing costs. Pursuant to the agreement, the Di stri ct has agreed to use these funds to facilitate the construction of a new District administrative office and/or joint corporation yard. Staff believes that in the long term, this will be a major benefit not only to the District but also to the City. Closure of this agreement should expedite the availability of District property for a joint corporation yard. CONCLUSION It is important to note that without participation by the City in the purchase of this property, the City and its residents would have lost an opportunity to obtain substantial park improvements to the Terra Nova Park. While the City may have been able to obtain additional park improvements as part of the subdivision review process, the improvements would not have been as extensive, or as well planned and designed, as those which resulted from the City's design competition which was part of the RFP process when the City rebid the Terra Nova site. In summary, the Woodcrest proposal represents a high quality design with interest, amenity, and a well-engineered solution to a unique site. After substanti al di scussi on it was chosen by the eval uati on committee to be the most responsive to the City's Request for Proposal. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed double escrow eliminates any negative fiscal impact on the City as all staff costs, processing and escrow fees are paid for through the proceeds of the escrow. This transaction does provide the City with a developer-estimated $850,000 in park improvements at Terra Nova Park. WPC 23l0A ~&'?'~d the City Council of Chula Vista, C)lifornia Dated l~l_~1