HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1978/10/24 Item 17CITY OF CHl1LA VISTA
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No. 17
For meeting of 10-24-78
ITEM TITLE Resolution 93 ~3 Approving a change in scope for the Park Way Comrrnznity
Center Project and amending an agreement with the project architect
SUBMITTED BY Director of Parks and Recreation
ITEM EXPLANATION
(4/5TH'S VOTE REQUIRED YES X NO )
On September 26, 1978, the City Council approved an agreement for architectural services
on a time and material basis in an amount not to exceed $25,500, with Thomas Williamson,
Architect. The agreement requires Mr. Williaason to provide the services needed to take
the preliminary project plans which had been prepared by Victor Wulff and Associates and
extract the community center portion from the overall recreation complex; to prepare work-
ing drawings and specifications, and to provide the architectural services required through
the community center project construction phase.
The proposed community center is within the Town Center Redevelopment Area. Mr. Williamson's
first task was to prepare schematic drawings of the project suitable for presentation to the
Town Center Design Review Board. After review of the schematics, the Design Review Board
disapproved the plans, based on nonconformance with the Design Review Manual and the austere
exterior design.
The community center was designed by the late Mr. Wulff over two years ago. This was long
before a keen interest in the Town Center Townscape Plan had become a reality. The original
design concept had been based on producing a functional recreation building at the least
possible cost. The present building design fits this original design concept, The design
ideally meets our functional requirements and the architects have incorporated every possible
cost cutting device to keep the building cost within the $380,000 budgeted.
At this stage of the project design, Mr. Williamson estimates that an additional $40,000 to
$100,000 in construction costs will be required to bring the building up to the standards
required by the Town Center Design Manual and the Town Center Design Review Board. Mr.
Williamson will also be required to make substantial changes to the present plans, thus re-
quiring $5,800 in additional funds for his services.
Rinds are available in the unappropriated balance of the Park Acquisition and Development
Fund to cover the additional construction cost and the cost for additional architectural
services. Continued on supplemental page no. 2
AK:mw
tXH1~115
Agreemen t Resolution X Ordinance Plat Notification List
Other ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached Submitted on
FINANCIAL IMPACT
An additional $40,000 to $100,000 for building construction may be required, depending upon
inflation anal the extent of change required to bring the present building plans into
conformance with the Town Center Townscape Plan. An additional $5,800 is required for
architectural services.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Council approve a change in scope for the Park Way Community Center project to provide for
improved architectural treatment of the building; and appropriate $5,800 for additional
architectural services from the unappropriated balance of the Park Acquisition and Develop-
ment Fund.
BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
COUNCIL ACTION _ A ~~~ , .~__
AGII`~A ITEM N0. 17
Meeting of 10-24-78
Supplemental Page No. 2
Staff recommends that the City Council approve a change in scope for the community center
project that includes improved treatment to the exterior design in order to make the
building compatible with other new construction in the town center area. Since the exact
cost for the improved exterior design is unknown at this time, appropriation of additional
construction funds will not be requested until Council considers the construction contract
approval.
It is also recommended that Council approve an amenc~nent to the agreement between the City
and Mr. Williamson that increases his maxirman compensation from $25,500 to $31,300. It
is further recommended that $5,800 be appropriated from the unappropriated balance of
the Park Acquisition and Development Ftiuid, and transferred to Account No. 616 6160 SBA01
to cover the cost for the additional architectural services.
935
. .
October 26, 1978
City C1 erk
T0: Chula Vista Design Review Board Members
~_.~' _ _ _
FROM: Paul G. Desrochers, Community Development Director
SUBJECT: Council Conference
The Chula Vista City Council has invited the Design Review Board to attend a
Council Conference meeting scheduled for 4:00 p.m. Thursday, November 2, 1978,
in the Council Conference Room.
The purpose of this meeting will be to jointly discuss and review the proposed
Memorial Park Recreation Center project.
We hope you will be able to attend this meeting and we look forward to your
participation Thursday afternoon.
The minutes of the October 11th meeting are included for your reference.
PGD: rd
Enclosure
r:~ -
~; 1 ~ _._~
~~~~ ~
MINUTES
TOWN CENTRE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
Wednesday, October 11, 1978
Administrative Conference Room 8:30 a. m.
The meeting was called to order by the Chairman with the following:
Members Present Chairman Prior; Members Starr, Araiza
Members Absent None
Members Excused P~embers Huntington, Williams
City Staff Present Community Development Coordinator Boyd, Senior Planner
Pass, Assistant Planners Griffin and Welch
Others Present Merritt Hodson
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF It was moved by Member Araiza, seconded by Chairman
SEPTEMBER 13, 1978 Prior and unanimously carried by those present to
approve the minutes of September 13, 1978 as mailed.
2. CHULA VISTA TOWN CENTRE Community Development Coordinator Boyd introduced
FOCUS AREA PROJECT Mr. Dick Zogob and Don Innis, the project architect.
He briefly outlined the progress of the project includ-
ing an explanation of the Disposition & Development
Agreement performance schedule, proposed plan processing,
and financing agreement. He stressed the importance of
the meeting and also the subsequent review of project
plans and materials to be presented at the workshop
session scheduled for November 10th.
Mr. Zogob stated the importance of meeting the perform-
ance schedule by all concerned.
Chairman Prior expressed his concern over possible
logistic problems in reviewing the project piecemeal,
although he did not want all the plans and materials
at once.
Community Development Coordinator Boyd discussed the
role of the Design Review Board in considering the
project EIR and the employment of the findings of the
EIR in their recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency.
Senior Planner Pass added that the Board must consider
all submitted elevations, the tentative map, and any
proposed changes to the plans.
Mr. Innis expressed his concern over the critical dates
for the submittal of the plans, especially noting the
requirements associated with October 25th. He explained
::10/11/78
_~,~~,a.~ , -.-..~.x:::, _~~~:
DRB meeting of
10/11/8
Page 2
that staff may not receive all review material prior to
the meeting of November 10.
Senior Planner Pass stressed the need for staff to
receive advance information for review as stipulated
by the Procedures Manual,
Chairman Prior agreed on the need for receiving advance
information and an early exposure to proposed plans.
Community Development Coordinator Boyd outlined the
information to be submitted by October 25th and sup-
plemental clarification items to be supplied by
November 10th.
Chairman Prior stressed the importance of the Board's
role and preferred no surprises or "bombs" to be in-
stantly presented before the Board. He added he per-
sonally did not feel the Board should review plans
prior to staff review. In addition, Chairman Prior
did not want this project to be reviewed on a piecemeal
basis similar to the First Federal project.
It was generally acknowledged by all present of the
critical need for reviewing all material within the
tight schedule.
Senior Planner Pass remarked on the openness of the
Board and their need for a steady flow of review
material. The Board's concern should be addressed to
design, not to the technical plat. He also mentioned
the need for the Current Planning Division to review
the proposed air space and the Board to approve the
preliminary subdivision plans.
With all preliminary comments made, Mr. Innis introduced
the residential phase of the Town Centre Focus Area
project. This included the general development plan
(site plan), and a discussion of the proposed townhouse
design and the subterranean tenant garage. He com-
mented on the scale and massing of the project.
Mr. Innis described in detail the particular character-
istics of the townhouse floor plans and other proposed
amenities. Single-level units would range from 1,096
sq. ft. to 1,700 sq. ft. in size and would contain 12
to 2z bathrooms. Two-story units would include features
such as backsided kitchens and skylights.
Mr. Zogob added each unit would have separate water
heaters, central heating, fireplaces, washer and dryer,
and ample storage space.
10/11/78
DRB meeting of
10/11/78
Page 3
Member Araiza commented on the fine nature of the
project and felt the massing treatment was progressing
satisfactorily.
Mr. Innis cited several proposed material changes and
other modified elements. These included type of roof,
exterior treatment, massing, and style of design. He
mentioned the consideration of a Spanish design.
Chairman Prior expressed opposition to a Spanish style
similar to the Collins proposal, but preferred wood
treatment.
Mr. Zogob agreed that a wood and stucco combination
was preferred but he would leave the design to Mr. Innis,
his architect. Mr. Zogob announced that G. L. Corey,
Inc. would be the project's builder.
Member Starr mentioned he liked the concept and the
height treatment, and that the architecture should be
left to the architect, Mr. Innis. He added that North
County's projects and character should be considered in
the design of the project.
At this time the presentation concluded.
3. MEMORIAL PARK RECREATION Coordinator Boyd introduced Aubrey Kesterson, Senior
CENTER PARK Administrative Analyst from the Parks & Recreation
Department and Mr. Tom Williamson, Architect. Mr. Boyd
outlined the project's history, noting Victor Wulff's
preliminary conceptual plans, and the City's financial
commitments to the proposed project.
Mr. Kesterson discussed previous plans to restore the
recreation center and pool area, and noted that the
project was originally proposed for funding under the
Public Works Bill, but did not receive funds from that
source. The project, however, was eventually funded
by the 1976 State Park and Bond Act which pledged
$307,000 to the project with the City of Chula Vista
contributing an additional $70,000.
Chairman Prior questioned whether staff had seen and
reviewed the project and whether the project had gone
through the proper channels for review.
Coordinator Boyd explained that the project had gone
through the review process when it was originally sub-
mitted for funding by the Public Works Bill, so es-
sentially the project had previously been approved by
the City Council. That was before the Design Review
10/1T/78
53s~
CRB me,ting'of
10/11/78
Page 4
Board was in existence. Staff learned just last week
that the project was scheduled for resubmittal to City
Council because it has been funded under the State
Bond Act. Therefore, staff has not reviewed the project.
Mr. Kesterson explained that because of the tight
time schedule with the schematics to be finished that
week, he had worked exclusively on the project with
Norm Williams, Assistant Director of Planning.
Architect Williamson presented the preliminary Wulff
plan. This included a multi-purpose gymnasium with
possible wood floors. Interior schematic drawings and
exterior elevations were reviewed.
Member Starr asked if the use of skylights or cross
ventilation had been considered.
Mr. Williamson noted that air conditioning was not in-
cluded in the project and that Member Starr's comments
had not been considered. Mr. Williamson explained the
roof plan and noted the original pitch was much higher.
In addition, the exteriorsmooth masonry surface may be
painted, pending appropriation of additional funds.
Member Starr suggested the use of sandblasting of the
exterior surfaces.
Mr. Williamson felt the best color would be similar to
the treatment of the structures at City Hall - white
with some highlights.
Member Starr suggested using darker colors.
Member Araiza stressed the need for comparison between
what is there already. This project would be visible
from the Zogob condominiums to the north, and this
would require addressing the north elevation.
Chairman Prior stated that he felt the proposed project
was a waste of money, a poor project fora redevelopment
area, and would replace some existing park land with
parking area. In addition, he stated the City should
be held to maintain the same high quality standards as
the private developer.
Member Starr asked if the appropriated project funds
could be spent elsewhere.
Mr. Kesterson explained the need for the facility in
this location and that the funds must be used on this
project.
10/11/78
DRB meeting of
10/11/78
Page 5
Senior Planner Pass stated the project review was
within the Board's jurisdiction. He added that the
Board could help the project by recommending design
changes. A discussion followed concerning the need
for the facility, the nature of the existing facility,
staffing concerns, and general taxpayer related issues.
Member Starr stated the scope of the proposed project
was inappropriate for Memorial Park and needed to be
scaled dawn, redesigned, and architectural amenities
added.
Member Starr suggested a paint up and spruce up"
approach with the consideration of a festive archi-
tectural theme and nature. This would be more archi-
tecturally acceptable, and could reduce the scope of
the project.
Member Araiza felt the proposed project would cause
the character of the park to be lost and was not
feasible with the proposed budget.
Chairman Prior stated the entire corner must be redone
with all elements - sidewalks, parking, and landscaping
to be addressed.
MOTION It was moved by Member Araiza and seconded by Member
Starr that the proposed project, on the basis of the
architectural treatment, was inconsistent with the
Design Manual, and that due to the proposed budget,
the project could not be considered feasible.
MOTION CARRIED The motion was carried by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Member Prior, Araiza, Starr
Noes: None
Absent: Member Huntington, Williams
MOTION WITH MODIFICATIONS It was moved by Member Starr and seconded by Member
Araiza not to reduce the scope of the project, but to
modify the architectural treatment to allow the project
to: (1) cover less area; (2) reflect a festive recre-
ation aspect and nature.
MOTION PASSED The motion passed by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES: Member Starr, Araiza
Noes: Chairman Prior
Absent: Member Huntington, Williams
10/11/78
~3.~3 ~ ~ :.: :.
~F .~ o-
DRB meeting of
10/11/78
Page 6
Coordinator Boyd suggesteda motion that would deny the
proposed project but a project would be acceptable
if the architecture was compatible with the Focus Area
development and met the design standards of the Design
Manual.
Mr. Boyd indicated that the Board's recommendation
would be included in the A-113 statement to the City
Council from the Parks & Recreation department.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 a.m.
~ ~
Michael L. Welch, Recorder
10/11/78
Form No. F-229
l~i/73
Certification of Unappropriated Balance
616 6160 SBA O1
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the money required for the
appropriation of funds for the purpose set forth in the attached
resolution is available in the Treasury, or is anticipated to
come into the Treasury, and is otherwise unappropriated.
Amount $ 5,800.00
Purpose Parkway Community Center Project
Bidder N/A
Director of Finance
The City of Chula Vista
Date 11/13/78 By
Certification of Unencumbered Balance
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the indebtedness and obligation
to be incurred by the contract or agreement authorized by the
attached resolution can be incurred without the violation of any
of the provisions of the Charter of the City of Chula Vista, or
the Constitution or the laws of the State of California, that
sufficient monies have been appropriated for the purpose of said
contract, that sufficient monies to meet the obligations of the
contract are actually in the Treasury, or are anticipated to come
into the Treasury to the credit of the appropriation from which
the same are to be drawn, and that said monies now actually in
the Treasury, together with the monies anticipated to come into
the Treasury, to the credit of said appropriation are otherwise
unencumbered.
Amount Not to Exceed $
Director of Finance
The City of Chula Vista
Date
Fund
Purpose
Bidder
CERTIFICATE OF CITY/DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
Fund Park Acquisition & Development
By
Dept./Activity
4
~~" 93' 3
Certificate No. 28
/~~.
IT IS iiEt~ BY ..:C'~U~ S ~~D b,~ t:ie u:~c:ers i~•,:ed t:1at the fol lo:-: ing
1tE'i?'i, ~:1t~1 tiZE' L::':wi:=.;':CllS COnS~~I'it O~ tii° Clt':' COL1::C11 Oi t}:C ~:1t.V O~
Ctlllld ~J15ta, JE' CO: S~G:Cr°d dT`iC dCtc G U:_Ori b~/ t-: C' COL1iiC11 ~lliSUdrit
to the c~rcvisiors o~ Sec.2.04.090 0~ t:~e Ch::~a Vita Cite Code.
r
Resolution - Establishing a Special Trust Fund for the Receipt
of Transient Occupancy Taxes
~'~~r'4-cam ~/
~~
Signature)
9
f the City Council, as indicated by the following
lJ ~-
r~
CA-301
j~~_~-!~
/7a,
_---
DFPARTM~NTAL CORR~SPCND~NC~
DATE: October 31, 1978
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Clerk
SUBJECT: Resolution establishing a special trust fund for the receipt of
transient occupancy taxes
The above resolution will be presented to the Council at the
meeting on Tuesday, October 31, as a Unanimous Consent Item.
C~,.ty o~ Chu.2a V~,dxa, Ca.~.ibann.ia
^ A 111
'A
c.~?.