HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984 01-24 CC MINBook 64
Page 42
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA
JANUARY 24, 1984
The regular meeting of the City Council of the City of National City
was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Morgan.
ROLL CALL
Council members present: Camacho, Dalia, Van Deventer, Waters (late),
Morgan. Absent: None. Administrative officials present: Benzing,
Bolint, Campbell, McCabe, McLean, Post.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG AND INVOCATION
The meeting was opened with salute to the flag led by City Manager
McCabe, followed with invocation by Dr. Charles Molnar, First Baptist
Church.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by Camacho, the minutes of the regular
meeting of January 17, 1984 be approved with the following correction:
Page 37, Para. 1, line 8: "the contractor is not being delayed..."
should be changed to "the contractor is now being delayed..." Carried,
by the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Camacho, Dallas Van Deventer,
Morgan. Nays: None. Absent: Waters.
Councilman Waters arrived in the Council Chambers.
PUBLIC ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
BEN CAMERON (Star News representative), 7350 Player Dr., San Diego, was
present and requested that Council participate in a special supplement
to the Star News, "PROGRESS", a business -oriented supplement with
special emphasis on growth and progress. Discussion. Councilman Waters
said before we spend the money, the editors of the Star News and Mr.
Cameron should get together with the City Manager and discuss what they
have in mind and give Council some kind of detail. Further discussion.
Moved by Morgan, seconded by Van Deventer, Council approve 12 page (no
color) at $1,148, and staff prepare the wording. Councilman Waters said
he could not vote for this without seeing what the money is being spent
for. Further discussion. Carried, by the following vote, to -wit:
Ayes: Camacho, Dalla, Van Deventer, Morgan. Nays: Waters.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The PUBLIC HEARING on the ADDITION of a new title,TITLE 7, PROPERTY
CONSERVATION and COMMUNITY APPEARANCE CODE to the National City
Municipal Code (The National City Municipal Code now contains a number
of regulations that are related to elimination and prevention of
blight; those regulations are scattered throughout the Code in a manner
that is confusing and difficult to use; they have not been updated to
keep pace with present day needs and they do not take full advantage of
available enforcement tools; this program will update and organize the
local code enforcement program and suggest certain needed controls
which have been lacking; input received from Council at the
November 29, 1983 workshop session has been incorporated into the
draft; staff recommends Title 7 be approved) was held at this time.
The City Clerk reported the Certificate of Publication was on file.
Planning Director Post said staff recommends approval, and read into the
record the headings on the code package: General Provisions;
Definitions; Abandoned Facilities; Environmental Conditions; Garbage
and Refuse Collection; Accumulation of Junk; Litter, Debris and
Rubbish; Graffiti Control; On -Street Activities; Outdoor Activities;
Housing Conditions; Apartment House and Condominium Property Management;
Vandalism and Security; Handbills and Billposters; Mosquitos and Flies;
Enforcement. BERNARD TRAGER, 516 E. 24th St., was present and spoke in
favor of this Code amendment. Planning Director Post said this will be
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 43
incorporated into the Land Use Code and the General Plan. Discussion.
ALLAN GAGNER, 801 Olive St., was present and inquired if this has
anything to do with automobiles on the street. Planning Director Post
replied that it does; it will assist in the alleviation of junk cars
on the street and on private property. Mr. Gagner inquired what the
City plans to do about the graffiti problem. Mr. Post replied this
code amendment makes the application of graffiti and allowing it to
remain enforcement matters. Further discussion. Councilman Waters
spoke of house movers in the City, saying one particular house mover
was operating in the City with no permit or license. Discussion. City
Attorney McLean said the City has requirements for house moving
permits; laws regarding hours etc. are contained in the permit package.
Mayor Morgan asked the City Manager to notify the Police Chief that we
have a problem with house movers operating without a permit. No one
else was present to speak in this regard. Moved by Waters, seconded by
Camacho, the Public Hearing be closed, Title 7 be approved, and all
stipulations of staff be adhered to. Carried by unanimous vote.
The PUBLIC HEARING on APPEAL of Planning Commission's DENIAL to ALLOW
DEVELOPMENT of an 11,000 sq. ft. single -story COMMERCIAL BUILDING for
RETAIL FURNITURE SALES, within the 2100 block of Plaza Blvd., South
side, PD-3-83 (Applicant proposes construction of a concrete block
commercial building for retail furniture sales and a 35-space parking
lot; the existing site is vacant and recently graded and cleared of
vegetation; access to the site is via a 27' wide easement through the
McDonald's parking lot; access on the other sides of the property has
been precluded by I-805 Freeway to the West, a drainage easement and
freeway off ramp to the North, and Council Resolution No. 14,007
prohibiting driveways onto 14th St.; traffic associated with a retail
sales use of the property could intensify traffic problems at the Plaza
Blvd. and Grove St. intersection; it is difficult to make left turns
entering or exiting Grove St.; the driveway access off Grove St. also
requires semi -trucks and trailers to swing into on -street parking on
Grove St. and into on -coming traffic from the parking lot; originally,
when the Planning Commission considered division of this property and
development of the McDonald's site, this portion of the property was
shown for development of a commercial building having a total floor
area of about 7,000 sq. ft. and parking for 62 cars; since development
of the McDonald's restaurant, vehicles have been observed 'stacking'
on the West side of the McDonald's site at the drive-thru entrance;
this could create an obstruction to vehicles exiting the proposed
parking spaces number 1 through 9, and may obstruct the circulation of
delivery trucks to the South side of the proposed building; staff
concurs with the Planning Commission's denial) was held at this time.
The City Clerk reported the Certificate of Publication and Affidavit
of Mailing were on file. Planning Director Post said the Planning
Commission was concerned about the possible aesthetic impact; they
determined that a furniture store might not be the best possible use of
subject property. LUDLOW KEENEY (Attorney for developer) was present
and said the 27' access is the only available access to this property;
the business is presently located in Spring Valley and approximately
35% of the customers are from National City; actual size of the retail
building will be 10,300 sq. ft.; his client is amenable and will
compromise. MR. MISKULIN, Scripps Ranch, San Diego, was present and
said he has been working on this projent for 5 years; before deciding
to consider opening in National City, he contacted several businessmen
in National City (furniture dealers) and they encouraged him; if his
business is approved, he will employ several people from National City
($200,000 in salaries); his business should do $20 million in the next
20 years; he runs a clean operation; it would be an asset to the City;
there is plenty of space for trucks to turn around; he can control when
deliveries are made; his plan is to receive deliveries from factories
in the Spring Valley store; the large semis will not be coming into
National City. Discussion. GARY FARIS, 1417 Grove St., was present
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 44
and said he has many years experience driving semis; he is well aware
of what it will take to get trucks into that driveway; when a delivery
truck has 32 stops to make in one day, you take it when you get it or
not at all; Eastbound on Plaza Blvd., there is a right turn lane; cars
park there all the time in spite of the "NO PARKING' sign; the turns
into the lot, jockeying to the loading dock and back out would be
almost impossible. Discussion. Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by
Dalla, the public hearing be closed and the appeal be denied. Carried
by unanimous vote.
The PUBLIC HEARING on APPEAL of PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL of ZONE
VARIANCE 14-83 to allow a parcel to be created without the required
50' of street frontage at 3600 East Eighth Street (This Zone Variance...
would allow the creation of a 2.5 acre landlocked parcel containing the
existing Wellington House and provide for the sale of 2.5 of the total
22 acre parcel; the applicant proposes a lot line adjustment between
two parcels of land creating 6,26 acres with frontage on Paradise
Valley Road and 2.5 acres without street frontage, but with access
provided via a 40' wide easement which provides a one-way concrete
driveway winding up slopes of 10 to 15% with turnouts for passing. The
Fire Dept. has investigated the accessibility and finds no problem...)
was held at this time. The City Clerk reported the Certificate of
Publication and Affidavit of Mailing were on file. Planning Director
Post reported staff recommends the Variance be granted. MICHAEL
BINGHAM, H.C.H. & Assoc. (engineers for applicant), 4877 Viewridge,
San Diego, was present and spoke in favor of the Variance. The City
Clerk read a petition in favor of the Variance, providing the property
remained zoned RS-1, signed by Ione Campbell, 808 Ethel Place; Carolyn
Reopelle and Delton Reopelle, 801 Ethel Place; Margaret Daily, 815
Ethel Place; Frank Perez and Betty Perez, 820 Ethel Place; Laura
Charles, 814 Ethel Place; Teddy Tafoya, 826 Ethel Place and Mary
Emerson, 1333 Manchester St. ROSE LANE, 810 Mary Court, was present
and inquired if there would be any change to the driveway which is
adjacent to her property. She was advised there would be no change.
Moved by Camacho, seconded by Van Deventer, the hearing be closed and
the variance approved. Councilman Van Deventer inquired if the
Wellington House could be placed on the historical register. The City
Attorney advised that the Planning Dept. is looking into it. ALLAN
GAGNER, 801 Olive St., was present and said he had no problem with the
Variance, but would like to see the remainder of the property developed
as R-1. (During discussion members of the City Council indicated they
would favor the development of the property with single family homes.)
Motion carried by unanimous vote.
The JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ON A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE NATIONAL CITY DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT (The purpose of
the public hearing is to consider a minor amendment to the Redevelop-
ment Plan by adding to the land to be acquired pursuant to the flan,
the real property located at 2868 Grove St., a single family residence
on 8,102 sq. ft. of land, AP No. 563-161-46, located within the
existing Redevelopment Project boundary. Complete EIR/EIS earlier
prepared and approved. Negative Declaration approved for subject
amendment on December 13, 1983) was held at this time.
Mayor Morgan called the Community Development Commission to order at
7:55 p.m.
Roll Call: Commissioners present: Camacho, Dalla, Van Deventer,
Waters, Morgan. Absent: None.
ARNOLD PETERSON, Executive Director, Community Development Commission,
said he provided Council and Commissioners with a copy of the Notice of
Hearing and a memo; the Downtown Redevelopment Plan was validated by
the California Supreme Court on December 28, 1983. Mr. Peterson said
he made reference to the blight surveys, to the basis of the project,
to the environmental reports; he was here tonight recommending to you,
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 45
as Director of Community Development, that you make a minor amendment
to the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown Project to add a single
parcel for acquisition under the plan; the parcel is at 2868 Grove St.;
Mr. Peterson displayed a drawing to orient Council/Commission to the
situation and explained the drawing showed Sweetwater Rd. to the South,
Grove to the West and to the North, to the North of Grove Way on the
top of the hill are single family houses; from Sweetwater Rd. looking
to Grove St. • is the tcxe of a slope and on top of the slope
on Grove St. are residences, there are several, across the street to
the South is the Sweetwater Town and Country Shopping Center. Mr.
Peterson continued six or seven years ago, the Redevelopment Agency was
interested in doing redevelopment on this side of the road and in fact,
we had meetings with the owners at that time, which we abandoned at the
time of Proposition 13 because Proposition 13 in effect cut off our
source of financing redevelopment on this side of the road; meanwhile
and separately, since that time private redevelopers have been
proceeding in this area with redevelopment; on this parcel there is a
new office building, this parcel is on our acquisition list under the
Downtown Project, the site of the Sweetwater Inn into the back of
single family residence; this parcel is a vacant parcel which is owned
by Thomas/O'Brien Investments who at one time, and maybe still now, are
owners of that property; Thomas/O'Brien Investments and Heartland
Savings and Loan have been assembling additional parcels over a couple
of years; this one here (pointing) on which there is a duplex, a
transmission building, another residence, a Volkswagen, here a real
estate office and a residential parcel; they have acquired these and in
addition to this parcel, they have in escrow two additional parcels (on
Grove St.), the parcel (under consideration for acquisition) is within
the City limits line and is adjacent to Grove St. which cul-de-sacs
here; the private redevelopers have been unable to secure this parcel;
he recommended to the Council and to the Commission that we hold a
hearing and consider acquiring this parcel under the Redevelopment; the
Community Development Commission authorized me at that time with the
consent of the owners to do two appraisals of the property to determine
the value to assist the owners in knowing at the time of hearing where
we stood so far as price; the owners of the property at first agreed to
such appraisals and later changed their minds, after I had hired the
appraisers, so we did not do that which you had authorized, I was
unable to do that. Mr. Peterson said he recommended that we do acquire
this parcel and facilitate this private redevelopment; the developers
are in the process of annexing this green -lined area which is now in
Lincoln Acres to the City; our assisting in acquiring this parcel would
aid them specifically by allowing that this hill, for the most part,
could be removed and in that manner get some depth and circulation and
access across this parcel and make it considerably better development,
much more along the lines of what you see across the street; so that's
the basic picture here. Councilman Waters asked the following
questions: Why didn't the developers buy the subject property when it
was on the market some months ago and not involve the City? If the
Agency acquires the property through condemnation, will it be sold to
the developers at so much a sq. ft.? If the Agency acquires the
property and sells to the developers, will the developers haul off that
big hill of dirt and just about pay for the property? Didn't Council
say when the Downtown Redevelopment Project was approved that no
residential properties would be taken? Executive Director, Community
Development Peterson answered he did not know why the developers did
not buy the subject property; he understood it was purchased last
summer; during the election statements/made re residential properties;
he was sure each member of the Council has a different view as to what
was in his mind in relation to this matter; it was not our motive and
we said so; as to the value of the property, he suggested in his
supplementary memo that our price to the redeveloper, whether it was
Heartland or Thomas/O'Brien or John Doe, ought to be the price we had
to pay to purchase the land; but he wouldn't charge for the building,
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 46
or demolition, or salvage value, or relocation because relocation costs
comes onto us specifically because we are a public agency. Councilman
Waters asked if they wouldn't pay that part of it. Mr. Peterson
replied, no, we pay up to $15,000 to the owner/occupant on relocation,
providing they buy another home; we pay the higher of the two
appraisals. Councilman Waters asked if the owners paid $88,000,
Councilman Camacho asked if Mr. Peterson at one time negotiated for the
property. Mr. Peterson said his recollection was that owners of the
frontage property were involved; the Valencia family owns two adjacent
parcels; the mother, Cielo, owns the northerly parcel, a duplex; Cielo,
son (Abel), and his wife (Rosa) own as joint tenants the subject
property which is a single family residence; Rosa and Abel live there
and would be eligible for relocation payment, Councilman Van Deventer
expressed his concern on the taking of a single family residence at any
cost; if the developer wants that kind of project, he should find a
suitable exchange acceptable to the owner; we should not bear any of
the cost to the developer; the project is a good idea but rather than
condemn the property, the developer should go out of his way and if it
costs $140,000, whatever the cost, the developer should pay. Mr.
Peterson explained the Agency must make the relocation payment.
VINCENT REYNOLDS, 1243 Manchester St., was present and asked was he to
understand that a private developer wants this City Council to condemn
this property, remove these people from this land so he can develop it?
Was that what was going on here? Would his house be safe? Will his
house be condemned for a developer? Mr. Peterson said that is exactly
correct; what is being requested is that the public agency aid the
private redevelopment by purchasing the home, relocating the family and
reselling the ground, which is part of a slope, for this commercial
development. Mr. Reynolds asked how the residents felt about it, or
did that matter. Councilman Camacho said the resident has the right to
refuse; he doesn't have to move and certainly this Council is not going
to force him to move. Mayor Morgan said that's the way redevelopment
works; the government gave us $10,000,000 to buy the Mile of Cars and
the industrial park; the government took three-quarters of the loss and
the City took one -quarter; but when we bought that piece of land and
put in streets and drains, we came out real well with a million -and -a -
half or two -million dollars left over; some people will notmove and we
have to hire appraisers and go through condemnation proceedings; but no
one has ever come back and said they were cheated. VINCENT REYNOLDS
said he had faith in Council and staff and asked that they make the
right decision. Councilman Van Deventer said what should be done in
this case is to work with the developer, perhaps redevelopment should
go out and find this individual a satisfactory home, the cost to move
and do this should be the developers and then he can go ahead and
develop the land; we wuld not be taking something away without giving
equal or better. ABEL VALENCIA, 2868 Grove St., was present and went
to the map to point out his property and his mother's property, and
said he bought and moved into the home to protect his family interests;
he did not want to move; they have lived in National City for
seventeen years; their original home was the site of Roberto's Family
Restaurant in the industrial park; his family was relocated then and
his parents moved into the duplex adjacent to 2868 Grove; his father
has since died and he is the head of household; he went into escrow in
February, 1983 for 2868 Grove; the property was in escrow for eight
months; they moved in in September; in October he was approached by the
developers and asked to sell; later Mr. Peterson asked him to sell. Mr.
Valencia said they were asking him to give up more than his home; he
values his life-style and family commitments; his wife works at Gemco,
only four blocks away; his son's school bus stop is only a few doors
down; he has easy access to Freeway 805 to get to his employment in
Clairemont; when they moved there they thought they would never be
bothered again by redevelopment; the boundaries of the downtown
redevelopment project are such that he did not know where they could
move in National City and feel safe. Mr. Valencia said he does not
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 47
plan to live there forever; when his mother reaches retirement age, she
will move into the single family house and rent the duplex --social
security is not sufficient to live on. Mayor Morgan cautioned Mr.
Valencia that after the commercial development is completed, his house
might be difficult to sell; he could command a higher price by selling
it to a commercial developer now. It developed in discussion the
mother's property (duplex) is within the County and is part of the area
proposed for annexation to the City; after annexation, her property
could be acquired by condemnation. Ccv ncilman Van Deventer said the
two parcels should be considered and asked if there was property in
National City with a single family home and two rental units, property
similar or better than he now has, and it was East of 1-805 (outside
the redevelopment boundaries) would Mr. Valencia consider that? Mr.
Valencia replied even though the land and house were equal or better,
no value could be placed on his life-style (the bus stop for his child,
the nearness of his wife's work, centralized location, living on a
cul-de-sac where his child can play safely), but he would consider it.
Councilman Van Deventer said the point he was trying to make is that
before we move on this, we should go back and pursue the means of what
is available in the City and asked Mr. Valencia if they/could give him
everything he wanted in square footage, etc. would he accept that. Mr.
Valencia replied that he did not plan to move. Councilman Van Deventer
said he understood that, but if everything could be worked out --that's
what we're here for tonight --would he have any problem? Mr. Valencia
said he was really firm on remaining. Mayor Morgan again cautioned
Mr. Valencia regarding the sale of his property as commercial property
now or a lesser amount later, saying once the development is built, he
will have lost all advantage. Discussion relative to the proposed
annexation and having both units in National City. Councilman
Van Deventer said this concerns Mr. Valencia's entire family; now is
the time to get together and try to find a place for the Valencias;
have the developer sit down with the redevelopment director and find a
piece of property that would have everything they now have, something
they would agree is equal or better, and we would pay to relocate both
the mother and the son. Councilman Waters expressed his concern that
the subject property was on the open market; the developers had the
same opportunity to purchase, they could have outbid him, that's what
bothers him. ROSS PROVENCE, attorney with offices in El Cajon,
representing Heartland Savings and Thomas/O'Brien Assoc. was present
and related some of the history of their acquisition of the various
parcels (stepped over to the map); Thomas/O'Brien and their related
organizations presently own the property on which is the commercial
building (corner of Grove and Sweetwater) which has Rees-Stealey
Medical Clinic and other tenants, a parcel in the redevelopment program
for acquisition, a two -acre parcel that has the graded bluff back to
Grove St. and then westerly side of the hill; Sweetwater North (a
general partnership between Heartland Savings and Loan and Thomas/
O'Brien) acquired five parcels when escrow closed on September 15, 1983
which included this parcel at the end of Grove St., the transmission
shop, the repair shop, the real estate office and the residential back
into the canyon; (pointing) this parcel, these two, this one and this
one; it was determined it would be advantageous for this development to
be in harmony with Sweetwater Town and Country and as an access and
entrance to National City to have this whole hill removed and have a
nice commercial development as you come into your City. Mr. Provence
continued, so we approached each of the five owners on the hill in
mid or late August of 1983; we learned the prior owner of Abel
Valencia's property was a friend of Mrs. Valencia and they had a first
refusal agreement, informal as it was, between them; apparently that's
what happened; we learned through public records (and Mr. Valencia
admitted) he paid $88,000 for that parcel; we told him we would offer
to pay him $100,000; he said he really did not want to sell but he and
his mother would sell the two parcels for $500,000; no way could the
developers afford to pay that; so we backed off. Mr. Provence said
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 48
they did successfully negotiate other parcels and now have all the
parcels on the hill except for Mr. Bailey's and the two Valencia
parcels; they were continuing to negotiate with Mr. Bailey; they felt
it was in the best interest of this project to include Mr. Valencia's
property and they are unable to acquire it through their own efforts.
Discussion. In answer to a question re the appraised value of the
Valencia properties, Executive Director, Community Development
Peterson said he made contracts with two qualified appraisers and they
were not permitted to enter the homes although the owners had previously
agreed. Councilman Van Deventer expressed concern over the developer's
acquisition of property around the Valencia properties; they must have
some design to use the mother's property also. Mr. Provence said that
was correct; he believed Mr. Peterson had alluded to the fact that
there is a petition presently for a minor general plan amendment and a
pre -zoning application, which should come before this body in early
February; that is preliminary to the annexation application to LAFCO;
his clients do control or own five of the seven parcels on the hill and
it would be their intent to include this entire area into the
development process so this would be one contiguous and harmonious
development which would be similar in style and nature to the Town and
Country project; approximately five acres. Councilman Van Deventer
asked if they did not acquire the mother's property and go to LAFCO,
will they annex the rest of it without that particular piece of
property? City Attorney McLean said the question is whether LAFCO will
annex with the mother protesting the annexation; assuming the
percentages are right, they will. Mr. Provence said there is no
question based on their analysis (they have both the area, the assessed
value of the five of the seven parcels) that LAFCO will accept and
approve the annexation. In answer to a question as to how long they
had worked at acquiring the properties, Mr. Provence said the escrows
came about fairly quickly; the property owner in the center parcel had
always been a stumbling block; then he came to Thomas/O'Brien and said
he would sell and thought he could put the other parcels in their
hands; all three of them were put into escrow within a four to six week
period and the escrow closed is less than sixty days. Mr. Provence
said until the five lower parcels actually closed in August, there was
no contemplation of acquiring the back parcels; it was at that time
that looking at the entire situation, they decided they should approach
the owners on the top and see if those parcels could not be integrated
into the overall project. Vice Mayor Dalla asked if they were able to
acquire the subject property, would they then after the annexation ask
Council to condemn the mother's property? Mr. Provence replied he
thought that probably would be the most logical approach for the City
and the developer in order to create an entire project in the area.
JOSE VALENCIA, Spring Valley, was present and tried to explain his
mother's and his brother's desires re the subject property and said the
two properties should be considered as one; he is referring to the whole
property; just because this side is in the City and the developers can
get that half, it would not benefit the family if it is sold that way;
the other part he knew would have to come into the annexation because
the developers have worked themselves around this way and they will try
to get this part; the developers will benefit by getting each part as
half instead of one single total unit. Councilman Van Deventer said
the only way is to acquire both of them and put your mother next to
whatever units you want; since the developer is going to push in and
through the same process, there's no sense putting you through misery
and us through something he really disliked without placing you in a
facility that you would be happy with, and your mother would be happy
with; to do half of it is totally wrong; either acquire both; that area
should be all as one; we should be out trying to locate something that
you would be happy with. Mayor Morgan asked if he would figure on
getting $500,000 out of it and said it will take quite a while to
annex that and he was not sure the developer wanted to hold the money
up and go ahead; we cannot move out in the County to do the
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 49
redevelopment; so if you're talking about buying both properties and
volunteered to sell both properties and it could be a year or two down
the road; he was sure with the property they've got there, they're not
going to hold up that long; they will leave you setting on the hill--
they'11 put you up on the hill and they'll go down below and leave you
set there. Jose Valencia said build around it; that's fine.
Councilman Camacho said we'll build around it. Mr. Provence said the
point the Mayor was making was well taken; the time for development is
critical to a developer; they are basically ready to proceed; they have
been holding the parcel to the West (2 acres) for almost 22. years; they
have some petitions before the City for an automotive center on that
parcel; if and when that is granted, they are ready to proceed and
build and when they build that automotive center, they will be building
some expensive retaining walls on the property line around the hill and
that will be the end; that cost will be a couple of hundred thousand
dollars; if they can't develop their property to the maximum they will
lose, the City will lose, and the present owners will lose the ability
to get the benefit of what they have in terms of potential
re -investment and potential for enhancing that entire property; once
those walls are up, the game is over. Councilman Van Deventer said he
still felt there should be some negotiation with the mother; he
understood that parcel isn't within the redevelopment boundary, but at
the same time, that did not hold the developer from dealing on the
other piece of property and work with them on the lower piece of
property, where there is no cost to the City, and work out something;
he just didn't think they had gone fax enough. Mr. Provence said they
were continuing the dialogue, negotiating to acquire that parcel and
the Valencias are presently represented by legal counsel. Mr.
Peterson brought to Council's attention that he attempted to have the
mother's property to the North appraised so they would have that
information if they wished to negotiate the sale of the duplex and the
owners refused to allow the appraisal. Abel Valencia said he did
obtain legal counsel, Michael Cowett, and he was the one who advised
him not to get appraisals, but as of Monday, he advised him to let the
appraisers in and cooperate with them. Councilman Van Deventer
suggested the matter be continued for two months to give an opportunity
for the lawyer to negotiate this. Abel Valencia said his attorney
advised him to get three appraisals: one for each of the properties,
and one for the two properties as a single unit. Mr. Peterson said
there would be two individual qualified appraisers and they would
appraise the properties separately and appraise the properties as a
single unit. Mr. Provence said he appreciated the Council's concern
about the negotiations, but the plans and applications are presently
filed with the City for the westerly parcel and those will be coming
up within a matter of two or three weeks and as soon as that is done,
the plans will be submitted for the buildings and the project will go
forward; if that happens, the acquisition of the hill parcels will be
out totally and that possibility will be lost. Vice Mayor Dalla said
if you would like to go ahead with that development and it's not
important enough for you to wait, then so be it. Councilman
Van Deventer said he agreed with that. Mr. Provence said he did not
want to debate; he could only say that the westerly parcels are
acquired and owned by a separate entity from the easterly parcels and
they have already completed their design drawings and the walls and the
whole thing. Councilman Van Deventer said the point is they are talking
about relocating a person and if we are going to relocate someone, he
wanted to make sure he was happy and he thought we should give him the
courtesy of at least two months to work this out and then bring it back;
the developers could give too; it had to be a two-way street. Mayor
Morgan said if he was the developer, he would just get in and develop
it and forget about this property; buy what you can and go ahead and do
it; this is the first time that we ever had people come in and have a
private redevelopment and he could not see any way that we could get
the Council to go ahead; so he would just go ahead and leave him up
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 50
there on the hill. Moved by Waters, seconded by Van Deventer, the
hearing be continued for two months (March 27). Vice Mayor Dalla
addressed (to Mr. Provence) saying, before you leave, you have
indicated the people are ready to proceed and applications have been
submitted; even if we were to approve this now, it would not happen
tomorrow; we're talking about relocation payments, appraisals and
modifications; even if we gave you everything you wanted tonight, it's
not going to happen immediately. Mr. Provence said they just don't
want to be put in a position two months from now to be starting over
and then hearing we need another two or three months; for developers,
time is money; they are waiting to move ahead. Vice Mayor Dalla said
the parcel on Sweetwater Rd. that was to be condemned has been tied up
in litigation; the same thing could happen here; what we're saying is
that we would like to have two months to have this worked out and if
not, then we'll move forward one way or the other. Motion carried by
the following vote, to -wit: Ayes: Camacho, Dalla, Van Deventer,
Waters. Nays: Morgan. Mayor Morgan recessed the Community
Development Commission.
Mayor Morgan called a three minute recess at 8:56 p.m.
Council reconvened at 9:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL:
Council members present: Camacho, Dalla, Van Deventer, Waters, Morgan.
Absent: None.
ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS
Moved by Camacho, seconded by Van Deventer, the Resolutions be
presented by title only. Carried by unanimous vote.
Resolution No. 14,230, "RESOL.UTION ABOLISHING 2-HOUR LIMITED TIME
PARKING ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF 4TH STREET FROM ROOSEVELT
AVENUE TO NATIONAL CITY BOULEVARD." Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by
Camacho, Resolution No. 14,230 be adopted. Carried by unanimous vote.
Resolution No. 14,231, "RESOLUTION ABOLISHING 2-HOUR LIMITED PARKING ON
THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF 'A' AVENUE FROM 6TH STREET TO 7TH STREET,
ALL WITHIN THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY." Moved by Van Deventer, seconded
by Dalla, Resolution No. 14,231 be adopted. Carried by unanimous vote.
Resolution No. 14,232, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND AUTHORIZING FILING
OF NOTICE OF COMPLETION (for Storm Drainage Facilities Upgrading in
Olive Avenue, Engineering Specification No. 937)." Moved by Waters,
seconded by Van Deventer, Resolution No. 14,232 be adopted.
Discussion. Carried by unanimous vote.
Resolution No. 14,233, "RESOLUTION APPROVING THE REPORT OF THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 1982 THROUGH
JUNE 30, 1983 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING THEREOF." Moved by
Van Deventer, seconded by Camacho, Resolution No. 14,233 be adopted.
Carried by unanimous vote.
Resolution No. 14,234, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING A FIRST
AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO FOR THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM, SEVENTH YEAR, 1981." Moved
by Van Deventer, seconded by Dalla, Resolution No. 14,234 be adopted.
Carried by unanimous vote.
Resolution No. 14,235, "RESOLUTION ADOPTING CLASS SPECIFICATIONS AND
FIXING COMPENSATION FOR A NEW POSITION OF JUNIOR CIVIL ENGINEER."
Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by Dalla, Resolution No. 14,235 be
adopted. Discussion. Carried by unanimous vote.
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 51
Resolution No. 14,236, "RESOLUTION OF AWARD OF CONTRACT (Lighting
Controls Installation at Kimball Park and Las Palmas Park, Engineering
Specification No. 942)." Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by Camacho,
Resolution No. 14,236 be adopted. Discussion. Carried by unanimous
vote.
Resolution No. 14,237, "RESOLUTION COMMENDING SWEETWATER HIGH SCHOOL
FOOTBALL TEAM ON THEIR WINNING THE SAN DIEGO SECTION III CIF
CHAMPIONSHIP." Moved by Waters, seconded by Camacho, Resolution No.
14,237 be adopted. Discussion. Carried by unanimous vote.
Resolution No. 14,238, "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPROPRIATION AND
TRANSFER OF FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF A 5-GANG FIELD MOWER."
Discussion. Moved by Waters, seconded by Camacho, Resolution No.
14,238 be adopted. Further discussion. Carried by unanimous vote.
ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION (FIRST READING)
"Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City, California
approving a Minor Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan and the
Relocation Program for the National City Downtown Redevelopment
Project, National City, California," was listed on the agenda but not
presented.
NEW BUSINESS
The City Treasurer/Finance Director's request for RATIFICATION of
WARRANT REGISTER NO. 29, dated January 17, 1984, in the amount of
$223,487.08 (Warrants Nos. 82433 through 82508 [voided 82433, 82439
and 82456]) was presented. Moved by Waters, seconded by Camacho, the
bills be paid and warrants drawn. Carried, by the following vote,
to -wit: Ayes: Camacho, Dalla, Van Deventer, Waters, Morgan. Nays:
None.
The CLAIM FOR DAMAG-S of Clark Matthew Earls, arising from an accident
on October 15, 1983, and filed with the City Clerk on January 16, 1984
was presented. Moved by Camacho, seconded by Van Deventer, this claim
be denied and referred to the City Attorney. Carried by unanimous
vote.
The CLAIM FOR DAMAGES of David W. Daniels, arising from an incident on
November 12, 1983, and filed with the City Clerk on January 12, 1984
was presented. Moved by Camacho, seconded by Van Deventer, this claim
be denied and referred to the City Attorney. Carried by unanimous
vote.
The Purchasing Agent's request for AWARD OF BID G.S. 8384-4 for
PURCHASE of 5-GANG MOWER with transport frame (The Park Dept. uses a
5-reel gang mower with transport frame to care for and maintain the
lawns in all the City parks; bids were solicited from 8 vendors with 2
respondents; the best bid in all respects was submitted by San Diego
Toro for $18,135.54; the City's current mower will not be traded in;
staff feels we could realize a higher return in the auction process;
only $9,500 was budgeted and is available in Account No. 643-422-224-511
for this purpose; an additional transfer and fund appropriation
requested and approved under Resolution No. 14,238, Item 13, this
agenda; staff recommends Bid G.S. 8384-4 be awaxt:ed to San Diego Toro
for $18,135.54) was presented. Moved by Waters, seconded by
Van Deventer, in favor of staff's recommendation. Carried by unanimous
vote.
The City Engineer's request for RATIFICATION of CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER
NO. 1 (Final) for STORM DRAINAGE FACILITIES UPGRADING in OLIVE AVENUE,
Engineering Spec. No. 937 (construction of catch basin required removal
and replacement of additional sidewalk; funds are available; staff
recommends approval) was presented. Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by
Camacho, in favor of this request. Carried by unanimous 'Dote.
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 52
The City Librarian's request for DISTRIBUTION of SB 358 FUNDS to
LIBRARY BUDGET (City Librarian Monroe received notification from the
State Librarian that $13,353 have been allocated to National City
Public Library for 1983-84 from SB 358, the Library Funding Bill; a
payment of 2/3 of the allocated amount is to be distributed to the City
within 6 weeks from the date of notification and the remaining 1/3 to
be distributed on May 15; the library, with the Library Board's
approval, is requesting these funds be distributed to the library
budget in the following manner: $3,353 to Acc unt 304 for library
books; $10,000 to Account 299 for contract services to continue and
maintain ongoing automation projects; approved by the Library Board of
Trustees at their regular meeting of Wednesday, January 11, 1984) was
presented. Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by Camacho, in favor of the
Library Board of Trustees' recommendation. Carried by unanimous vote.
The request of the FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES for TEMPORARY USE PERMIT
to conduct a "LAS VEGAS NITE", February 4, 1984 from 6:00 p.m. to
midnight at 1131 Roosevelt Ave. (This event is a fund raiser for the
Eagles and they request a waiver of all fees; Building & Safety,
Planning, Fire, Finance and Police Departments have reviewed and
recommended approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Event
must be held in accordance with the guidelines set down by the District
Attorney's Office, County of San Diego; No Bingo; 2. Event subject to
inspection by the NCPD; 3. Occupant loads shall be as noted on floor
plan and shall be posted the same; 4. Exits shall be a minimum of 36"
wide and unobstructed; 5. Exits shall be maintained unobstructed;
6. Two 2A:IOBC fire extinguishers shall be provided; 7. Sufficient
ashtrays shall be provided; 8. Secure permit from Fire Dept.) was
presented. Moved by Waters, seconded by Van Deventer, in favor of this
request. Carried by unanimous vote.
OTHER BUSINESS
PLANNING COMMISSION - NOTICE OF DECISION
Planning Commission Resolution No. 62-83, APPROVING ZONE VARIANCE to
ALLOW DIVISION of .54 ACRES into TWO PARCELS, one of which will have
only 25' of frontage in lieu of required 50' at 1239 '0' Ave., Z-7-82
(Applicant proposes to divide .54 acres into 2 parcels as follows:
Parcel 1: 6,400 sq. ft. in area with 24.77 linear feet of frontage on
'0' Ave. in lieu of the required 50'; Parcel 2: 15,420 sq. ft. in
area with 76 linear feet of frontage on Palm AVQ.; this parcel contains
a single family residence; access to Parcel 1 is from '0' Ave. and
access to Parcel 2 is via an 18' wide easement over Parcel 1; access to
Parcel 2 from Palm Ave. is precluded due to topography; site topography
slopes are moderate to steep at 5-25% across Parcel 1 and 5-35% across
Parcel 2 in a North Easterly direction; property zoning and general
plan designation is RS-2; staff concurs with the Planning Commission's
approval) was presented. Ordered filed by unanimous vote.
The report of the TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE from their meeting of
January 11, 1984 was presented. Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by
Camacho, the report be approved. Carried by unanimous vote.
CITY MANAGER
City Manager McCabe asked the Purchasing Agent to display a design for
the new "Welcome to National City" signs. Discussion. Moved by
Morgan, seconded by Van Deventer, in favor of the proposed design, but
delete 'California' and add 'Founded in 1887'. Further discussion.
Carried by unanimous vote.
CITY ATTORNEY - No report.
1/24/84
Book 64
Page 53
OTHER STAFF
The City Clerk spoke of the Claim for Damages of Julia Hernandez,
denied by Council on January 10, 1984, saying this claim should have
been denied for reason of "late filing" and our insurance carrier
requests Council move to deny Mrs. Hernandez' claim for reason of late
filing. Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by Camacho, this claim be
denied for reason of late filing. Carried by unanimous vote.
MAYOR
Mayor Morgan inquired if bids had been obtained for air conditioning
at the Casa. Discussion. Moved by Morgan, seconded by Waters, the
City Manager be authorized to go to bid using the funds set aside for
the Public Relations Position. Further discussion. Carried by
unanimous vote.
CITY COUNCIL
Councilman Waters invited Council to attend the annual meeting of the
Historical Society at Granger Hall, 1:00 p.m., Sunday, January 29.
Vice Mayor Dalla inquired if individual copies of Resolution No. 14,237
would be ready to distribute to the Sweetwater Football Team on
Saturday. City Manager McCabe assured him they would be.
ADJOURNMENT
Moved by Van Deventer, seconded by Camacho, the meeting be adjourned
to 4:00 p.m., February 7, 1984. Carried by unanimous vote. The
meeting closed at 9:22 p.m.
Ur
CL
E CITY LE
The foregoing minutes were approved at the regular meeting of the City
Council on February 7, 1984. /
Corrections
No Corrections
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY, CALIFORNIA
1/24/84