Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Minutes 041399Approved as submitted DATE: 04/27/99 Minutes REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 13,1999 (immediately following City Council Regular Session) Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 9:10 p.m. ROLL CALL: Present: Board Members Clay, Lerno, Luna and Chairman Johnson Absent: Board Member Arrambide Others Present: Board Secretary Marcia Torgerson and City Treasurer David Graham Staff Present: Executive Director Wade McKinney, Police Sergeant Jeff Fredricks, Fire Chief Mike. McCain, Community Services Director Brady Cherry, Administrative Services Director Rachelle Rickard, Community and Economic Development Director Paul Saldafia, Special Projects Coordinator Greg Greeson, and City Attorney Roy Hanley. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: MOTION: By Board Member Luna and seconded by Board Member Clay to approve the agenda. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll -call vote. COMMUNITY FORUM: None. A. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Redevelopment Agency Minutes - March 9, 1999 - (Board Secretary recommendation: Approve) [Marcia McClure Torgerson] 2. Redevelopment Agency Minutes - March 23, 1999 - (Board Secretary recommendation: Approve) [Marcia McClure Torgerson] MOTION: By Board Member Luna and seconded by Board Member Lerno to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion passed 4:0 by a roll -call vote. B. PROJECT STATUS REPORTS: 1. March 1999 Community and Economic Development Director Paul Saldana explained that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the draft EIR. The comments given at the hearing will be considered in the Planning Commission review of the EIR, held on May 4, 1999. Paul Saldana stated that Item 2 was a preliminary report which was transmitted to each affected taxing entity, on Monday 12, 1999. He assured the Council that they would receive a copy of the report tomorrow. He expects to have a variety of consultation meetings with the taxing entities over the next couple weeks to discuss the financial feasibility and what affects implementation of the redevelopment project. Mr. Saldana commented that he has participated in meetings with the public to discuss redevelopment and solicit projects/specific activities for consideration in future implementation plans. He has responded to requests for presentations to service and other organizations and expects them to continue. Finally, prior to the public hearing, which is a formal process for the council's review of the report, the proposed redevelopment plan, financial feasibility, blight analysis and comprehensive program, a Forum has been scheduled to present and gain input in regards to the redevelopment plan. Board Member Luna stated draft EIR is available at the Quad Knopf web site. C. MANAGEMENT REPORTS: None 1. Use of Eminent Domain - (Staff recommendation: Board review options for use of eminent domain and provide direction to staff for inclusion in the redevelopment plan) [Paul Saldana] Executive Director Wade McKinney explained staff included this item on the agenda to educate the Agency and the public on the complex procedure of eminent domain as it relates to redevelopment. Mr. Saldana explained in detail the procedures involved in the use of eminent domain. RA 04/13/99 Page 2of4 Council Member Clay asked if the Council can limit the use of eminent domain and, for example, not use it concerning residential single-family but use it for residential multi -family. Mr. Saldana responded that the Council may adjust the use as they wish. Council Member Luna used overheads and stated that he feels eminent domain should only be used concerning public property. He said he supported the use of eminent domain concerning Stadium Park where it was used because the park had been in the general plan. He felt that a study session on the subject would be necessary (see Attachment A). Council Member Lerno questioned whether eminent domain would be necessary. Executive Director Wade McKinney discussed some of the pros of having eminent domain. Mayor Johnson stated that he would agree to limit the use of eminent domain by not using it on single family residential property. PUBLIC COMMENT John McGoff, 9192 Maple St., read a prepared statement where he referred to the Health and Safety code #33392. He asked if the staff brought the Westar contract to the Council based on the code. Mr. McKinney explained that the Westar contract was brought to the City not initiated by the City. City Attorney Roy Hanley explained that the Westar contract only asked the Agency to consider the use of eminent domain. (see Attachment B) Eric Greening, 6600 Lewis Ave., agreed with the comment to have a study session on this issue, cautioning the Council to move slowly. Dwight Huffman, 5943 Traffic Way (business address) stated he supports a study session on this issue. Also, he requested, because a 40 -year plan can be quite complicated, if there was some way to consider some plans for the next 5 years. Dorothy McNeil, 8765 Sierra Vista, asked if in the pre-eminent domain period is only one appraisal required. Mr. Saldana responded, yes. Mr. Hanley explained that only one is required, as the process of eminent domain is an adversarial procedure. Rush Kolemaine, P.O. Box 1990, stated that the Council, as the Redevelopment Agency, is finding out how difficult it is to be both entities. He encouraged the Agency to be very accessible to the public and hold study sessions whenever possible. Dorothy Smith, Morro Road, stated that she was appalled at the number of grocery stores and used car lots in this town. She believes that a craftsman village would be an asset to this community. Lorraine Lane, 5275 El Camino Real (business address), the City Clerk read Ms. Lane's prepared statement in which she stated that she was opposed to condemnation for private used instead of public use. RA 04/13/99 Page 3 of 4 Chairman Johnson closed the Public Comment period. There was Board consensus to schedule a Study Session on this issue. A. ADJOURNMENT: Chairman Johnson adjourned the meeting at 10:16 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting on April 27, 1999. MEETING RECORDED BY: Marcia McClure Torgerson, Board Secretary MINUTES PREPARED BY: Melanie Whaley ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A -Overhead presentation of Council Member Luna's Attachment B -Prepared statement by John McGoff, dated 4/13/99 Attachment C -Prepared statement by Loraine Loine, dated 4/13/99 RA 04/13/99 Page 4 of 4 a) Is not needed for those .specific activities outlined in this Plan; b)Is not needed to provide for or replace very low-, low-,. and moderate -income .housing pursuant .to specs c provisions of ihis.Plan; - c) Is not needed for any other public improvement or facility; d)Is not needed to promote historical or architectural preservation;. e) Is not needed to remove the blighting influences on surrounding properties which might prevent achievement of the objectives of this Plan but, rather, said property will develop in conformity with the objectives of this Plan through private initiative; f) Is not needed for the elimination of any environmental deficiency .including; among other things, inadequate street layout, incompatible and mixed land uses, overcrowding and small parcel size; or g) Is not needed for the removal of impediments to land development and disposition through assembly of land into appropriately sized and shaped parcels served by improved circulation, parking, and utilities. Attachment: B Atascadero Redevelopment Agency Meeting Date: 4/13/99 . Community Forum April 13,1999 John McGoff 9192 Maple Street Atascadero Mr. Mayor Members of the City Council: Let me start out by saying: "there you go again". Inasmuch as it has agreed that the Community may address subjects not specifically on the City Council Agenda, I will speak my piece now and, if necessary again at the CRA meeting. It has been said that if you repeat something often enough, people begin to think that whatever you have been saying is their own idea. Hope springs eternal! How many times are we going to revisit the Eminent Domain topic? Let me say that I am unalterably opposed to use of Eminent Domain for other than public purposes. I'll qualify that, use of Eminent Domain as established in the Constitution, for schools, parks, fire stations, etc. Not Eminent Domain as codified in the California Health & Safety Code. I believe that his exercise tonight is premature and factually inaccurate. For example Eminent Domain and the necessity for formation of a Project advisory are usually considered together, and this only when the project area's land use composition has been determined.] THE LAW, as often expressed here, dictates that if a plan contains either the power of eminent domain over property on which persons reside, or, if public improvement projects cited in a plan will require displacement of low and moderate income persons, the city is required to have a Project Advisory Committee. Are we there yet???? The Importance of a- full and fair public hearing on this subject cannot have been lost om you when you recall the anger and resentment expressed during the Westar/Vons/Rite Aide hearing. I hope that this exercise tonight is not because of the Westar project and preping that one under Section 33392 of the Health & Safety Code. I have a hunch that that was what drove the premature and ill-advised proposal of that project by Westar. I hope what we are saying here is heard, not only by those present, but also by the Public through the reporters present here tinight. I don't think that the reporting of these meetings reflect the tone, essence nor the concern of those addressing this body, whether it sits as the Council or the RDA. just as the public deserve better than pro -forma community Forums, they also deserve better than pro=forma reporting. Ad -Hoc decision such as this one tonight may well be subject to challenge. This staff report and it's potential are too important to be approved in a rush to judgement. Frankly, it is not well enough developed to ask you to take it as it is. Whe it comes to residential areas, and the potential effects of redevelopment on people, caution mandates that we take a critical look at the project area as more than just a vehicle for the extraction of tax increment, a process more akin to taking money out of one pocket and putting it into another with a hole in it. Thank you.