Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRA Minutes 2004-06-21 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, JUNE 21, 2004 AT 7:30 PM Regular Meeting: Present: Albert J. Boro, Chairman San Rafael Redevelopment Agency Cyr N. Miller, Vice-Chair Paul M. Cohen, Member Barbara Heller, Member Gary O. Phillips, Member Absent: None Also Present: Rod Gould, Executive Director Gary T. Ragghianti, Agency Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, Agency Secretary CLOSED SESSION – CONFERENCE ROOM 201 None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE:8:21 PM None. CONSENT CALENDAR: Member Phillips moved and Member Miller seconded, to approve the following Consent Calendar item: ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of Monday, June 7, Minutes approved as submitted. 2004 (AS) AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Miller, Phillips and Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None ABSTAINING: MEMBERS: Heller (due to absence from meeting) PUBLIC HEARING: 2. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGETS FOR FISCAL YEARS 2003-2004 AND 2004-2005 BUDGET (MS) – FILE R-103 x (SRCC) 8-5 Assistant City Manager Ken Nordhoff stated this report proposed actions for the two fiscal years of the current two-year Redevelopment Agency budget. He noted that last July, the Agency adopted a two- year budget and laid out a specific set of spending plans and priorities, some of which he would highlight this evening. Mr. Nordhoff reported that a number of projects remained in progress or under consideration due to the fact that bonds were issued in 1999. Funding that remained is committed to the Medway/Canal project, Pickleweed Expansion, completion of the Third and C Street parking structure, and a small amount set aside for administration, through 2008. Explaining the purpose for this, Mr. Nordhoff stated the Agency staff had generated a five-year funding plan for the offices and staff, and the monies to do this had been committed through 2008 as part of this budget plan. 1 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page 2 Indicating that for the first time low and moderate-income housing money was being used to assist in the payment of debt service that related to the 1992 bond issue, Mr. Nordhoff stated that approximately $292,000 would be used in this current year as an amendment, and also next year, in terms of paying for that debt. He added this was a new item. With regard to the amendments for fiscal year 2003-2004, Mr. Nordhoff stated that almost $3 million had been added to recognize the cost of project expenses to date, particularly for the Pickleweed facility, as well as the parking structure. He indicated these were not new monies, rather simply identified the amount of appropriations necessary this year to match up with projected expenses. Mr. Nordhoff stated the Agency had already approved a payment to the College of Marin, and this budget modification had been made in a separate action last month. He stated that an obligation to the San Rafael High School District was also included; therefore, payments to them had been increased by $179,000. Mr. Nordhoff stated that Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 summarized the revenues and expenses as adjusted and identified the revised balances of the six funds for the current year. Looking ahead to next year, Mr. Nordhoff stated there were some operational items that were a reflection of some budget balancing coming from the City Council action on tonight’s agenda. This included the addition of a Code Enforcement Officer to be paid from the low and moderate income housing funds, some additional support for events run downtown, and the work performed by streets and parks crews. Mr. Nordhoff stated that $15,000 of cost was being added, to be borne by the Special Events budget, which relieved the City of that obligation for the coming year. Mr. Nordhoff stated that Exhibits 4, 5 and 6 codified revenues, changes in expenses and the projected balances. He indicated there was a series of monies identified as reserves that were set aside for future projects, administration and an obligation to the High School District, and $1 million was set aside for future housing programs. Indicating that Economic Development Director Nancy Mackle had updated the Goals and Objectives, included with the report, Mr. Nordhoff stated she would be happy to answer questions. Chairman Boro declared the public hearing opened and there being no comment from the audience, closed the public hearing. Chairman Boro invited Ms. Mackle to address in general terms the future of the Agency and issues under consideration with respect to the School District, the College Board, County, etc. Ms. Mackle reported that staff had been working for some time evaluating the fiscal agreement with the other taxing agencies to find a way to rearrange or amend it, in order to keep funding the Agency for future years without having an impact on the other agencies. She indicated staff had a draft plan which they believed would work. They were endeavoring to schedule meetings with the School District and Rich Arrow’s office at the County, to work through it in more detail with their staff and consultants to ensure it was correct and would work as envisioned. Ms. Mackle indicated it would take a few more meetings over the summer for it to come together; however, staff was optimistic it would work, the Agency would be funded and bonds would be issued in the future to do additional projects, as in the past. 1) Member Heller moved and Member Phillips seconded, to adopt the Resolution. 2 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2004-14 – RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE 2003-2004 BUDGET AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips and Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None 2) Member Cohen moved and Member Miller seconded, to adopt the Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-15 – RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE 2004-2005 BUDGET AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips and Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None AGENCY CONSIDERATION: 3. PRESENTATION OF DRAWINGS AND PLANS TO BE SUBMITTED TO MTC (METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION) FOR THE CANAL MEDWAY PROJECT (RA) – FILE R-459 x (SRCC) 140 Economic Development Director Nancy Mackle reported three projects were being funded from 1999 bonds – Pickleweed Expansion, Parking Structure and the Canal Medway Street Improvements. She indicated these were the types of projects where Agency staff works as team members with other departments, i.e., Public Works and Community Services. Ms. Mackle stated that the team of Stephanie Lovette, Economic Development Coordinator and Richard Landis, Administrative Supervisor, Public Works, would present the plans for the Canal Medway project. Ms. Lovette reported that a couple of years ago the Redevelopment Agency committed $250,000 to this project, and a grant of $900,000 was received from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission- Transportation for Livable Communities (MTC-TLC) for this project. She anticipated the plans would be to MTC at the end of June. Ms. Lovette explained that the project basically covers Medway Street, from East Francisco Boulevard to Canal Street and is the major entrance to the Canal neighborhood, which is home to approximately 12,000 people. She noted that all of the Golden Gate Transit and school busses pass through that area; it is an informal town square where people get off the bus from work, shop, and meet school busses. Stating it was an active commercial and industrial area with delivery trucks and auto uses, Ms. Lovette indicated that the existing conditions could be seen from the first and second slides. Although unattractive, she stated this was the area that anchored the neighborhood on one side with Pickleweed on the other. Referring to Slide 3, Ms. Lovette explained that a large part of the MTC grant process was focused on community participation, which was gratifying to work on as it was possible to build on what had been done in Canal Voice, in the Pickleweed Expansion, and also all of the work on community leadership done by non-governmental organizations in the neighborhood. She believed the neighborhood was now aware of the City, was becoming more excited about engaging, and City staff had also become better at figuring out who neighborhood leaders were and how to engage the community. 3 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page 4 In terms of outreach, Ms. Lovette reported they worked with Amphion, consultants chosen by the community. Questionnaires were distributed, they walked the streets and stood at bus stops to ascertain what people wished to see. She indicated that a lot of community engagement was conducted. Ms. Lovette explained that a further slide depicted what people wanted, which was mainly wider sidewalks. Subsequent to garnering these opinions, Ms. Lovette reported that Amphion produced a plan, which basically reconfigured the Canal Medway/Belvedere intersection to afford more pedestrian safety, less pedestrian time in the intersection, acquainting people through intersection tabling, etc., that they now were in a pedestrian area and carried out bulb-out to reduce the time in a crosswalk. She indicated that more lighting was being installed, sidewalk widening would be carried out, and she noted the repeated request for “más árboles” - more trees. Ms. Lovette also noted the request for a gateway at Francisco Boulevard, similar to Terra Linda. Ms. Lovette reported that staff was now working with Engineer, Doris Toy and Amphion to put the concepts into the final design. Richard Landis, Administrative Supervisor, Public Works, stated the project needed to be designed and with MTC by June 30, 2004, and should this not happen, there would be no chance of obtaining the capital funding associated with the project, noting there only was a partial approval at this time to spend money on the final design. He stated the complication with this go around with the TLC (Transportation for Livable Communities) project was that it is CalTrans’ money and brings a level of bureaucracy not experienced previously. Regarding the next steps, referring to a slide, Mr. Landis explained the final design was due in nine days. A 90% design was received today which had been forwarded to MTC and CalTrans for their review. Should all go as expected, over the summer, they would go through their final review process and hopefully, approve the project as of September. The project would then go out to bid in November with a three-four month construction timeline. He noted the work could be carried out very quickly. Explaining the caveats, Mr. Landis stated the funds were by no means certain. This had to do with the state budget crisis, the California Transportation Commission making final decisions in July for these and other TLC projects. He indicated it was staff’s recommendation not to go forward with the project unless formal assurances were received from CalTrans and MTC that the funds were available. Mr. Landis stated that otherwise, the City would be in the position of having to front almost $1 million for the project, which was not realistic at this time. Regarding the second caveat, Mr. Landis explained it could be seen from the “after” slide what the corridor would look like without the overhead utility lines, which were unattractive and added to its visual negativity. He noted that participants repeatedly indicated their preference to remove those lines and the proposal was submitted to MTC with that in mind. Mr. Landis stated staff had learned since then of the ability to identify funds, approximately $500,000, to design and construct an underground utility district, to remove the overhead lines and underground all utilities. The difficulty, he explained, was that it would take two years from start to finish, to design and construct. Mr. Landis reported that staff had approached MTC, met with the liaison, brought her to the project area and discussed the possibility of delaying the streetscape portion for two years to carry out the undergrounding. Reporting that the liaison was very open to the idea and although she ultimately would not be the decision-maker, Mr. Landis stated staff wanted her to approach MTC in a formal manner. He added that the best project was that without the overhead utility lines, which had general agreement amongst staff and most importantly, in the community. He indicated that staff hoped the project could be delayed to underground the utility lines to do it right. 4 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page 5 Member Heller stated it was her understanding that all Rule 20A program funds had been promised to the Terra Linda community as the next project to be undergrounded. Mr. Landis stated there was approximately $730,000 in hand presently for undergrounding. PG&E Rule 20A money was still being received, which was approximately $350,000 - $360,000 each year, and staff was proposing the option of considering diverting some of those funds. He stated that in a very preliminary way, staff believed it would cost approximately $500,000 for design and construction, which could change. Mr. Landis stated it would be the Agency Board’s decision to consider that option. Executive Director Rod Gould stated staff would present a separate agenda item with these choices and the information when fully developed, for decision-making. Reiterating Member Heller’s question, Member Cohen stated he would like to see some more on this as he believed there was a commitment, and while this was a real opportunity, it needed to be balanced in light of promises made. Member Cohen inquired whether it was envisioned obtaining this money from CalTrans and MTC and then holding it for two years, or would the money merely be allocated. Assuming the Rule 20A program money was available, and in the absence of the issue just raised it was decided to proceed, he inquired whether there would be a commitment, whether the funds would be in hand, or whether the indication would be that it would be funded, making the money available in two years. Agreeing this was the heart of the matter, Mr. Landis stated staff posed this question to the liaison, who is relatively new to the project. He indicated that MTC and CalTrans’ decision would be to either hold the money, giving a formal commitment that the funds would be available in two years, or make the money available up front. Mr. Landis suspected the funds would not be available up front and he further suspected they had probably over-obligated their grants. Member Cohen expressed a need for caution, and while agreeing it would be a shame to miss the opportunity to carry out the undergrounding, he believed it would be more of a shame to carry out the undergrounding and lose the grant funding to do the project itself. Regarding the transportation funding world presently, Member Cohen stated that projects ready to go were being funded and future projects were being raided. He stated staff would have to verify that the money was available, and assuming it was now, would have to think really hard about taking it and going forward with the project without the undergrounding, as he was unsure whether even a promise it would be there in two years would hold up. Mr. Landis stated staff just wanted to pose the question to at least give the project a chance. Referring to the section of the staff report which indicated there were 55 applications totaling $59 million, Chairman Boro reported that $9.5 million was allocated, and from this figure, San Rafael was being allocated potentially $900,000. He stated staff and the community were to be congratulated on presenting a project that could compete with others throughout the entire Bay Area at that level, which was extremely commendable. Chairman Boro stated it made sense to at least explore the undergrounding; however, concurred with Member Cohen’s expression of concern about transit funds. From his own experience and the current experience on 101 and completion of the GAP Closure, he noted money had a tendency to disappear. Chairman Boro stated he was more concerned about that than possibly trying to explain postponing Terra Linda for a year and a half. He concurred with Member Cohen that it was necessary to ensure there was a lock on these funds; otherwise, it would be wise to obtain them and do whatever was possible. He thanked Ms. Lovette and Mr. Landis for their great work. 5 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page 6 Chairman Boro invited comment from the audience. Roger Roberts stated he was speaking as a private citizen who participated in a lot of Steering Committee meetings for the General Plan 2020 and the Charette process, one of which involved the Medway area. He inquired whether this Redevelopment proposal for the Medway corridor would be consistent with the 2020 Vision. He indicated it appeared that a lot of time was spent thinking about how to create a neighborhood character and entry in the 2020 plan for that particular area and it would be a mistake to go forward with this project, even at this late date, should it not be consistent with the 2020 General Plan. Economic Development Coordinator Stephanie Lovette confirmed it was consistent with General Plan 2020. Member Cohen moved and Member Heller seconded, to accept the Plan. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips and Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None AGENCY MEMBER REPORTS : San Rafael City Plaza: - File R-423 x R-140#8 4. Thanking the Agency Board for working with the Business Improvement District to place furniture in the Plaza, Economic Development Director Nancy Mackle reported that it was installed today and she distributed pictures. There being no further business, the San Rafael Redevelopment Agencymeeting was adjourned at 8:45 PM. __________________________________ JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Agency Secretary 6 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 06/21/2004 Page