Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRA Minutes 1997-06-16SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, MONDAY, JUNE 16, 1997 AT 7:30 PM Regular Meeting: San Rafael Redevelopment Agency: Barbara Heller, Member Cyr N. Miller, Member Absent: Gary O. Phillips, Member Present: Albert J. Boro, Chairman Paul M. Cohen, MemBer Also Present: Rod Gould, Executive Director Gary Ragghianti, Agency Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, Agency Secretary CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 PM None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: 7:45 PM None Ke)kKja4k4WWO.,10:4k107.111114 Member Cohen moved and Member Heller seconded, to approve the following Consent Calendar items: ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approval of Minutes of Special Joint Budget Approved as submitted. Hearings of Thursday, June 20, 1996 and Monday, June 24, 1996, and Regular Meetings of Monday, May 19, 1997 and Monday, June 2, 1997 (AS) 2. Reappointment of Glenn S. Koorhan, Approved staff Deborah Stapleton, Don Swartz, and recommendation: Reappointed Anise M. Turina to Fill Four Glenn S. Koorhan, Deborah Four-year Terms on the Citizens Stapleton, Don Swartz, and Advisory Committee on Redevelopment, Anise M. Turina to fill four, Terms to Expire End of June, 2001 (AS) four-year terms on the - File R-140 IVB Citizens Advisory Committee on Redevelopment, terms to expire end of June, 2001. 4. Resolution Extending Contract with RESOLUTION 97-24 - Richard Bornholdt Consulting Group RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE (Current Contract From July 1, 1996 DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC Through June 30, 1997) (RA) DEVELOPMENT TO EXTEND THE - File R-173 x (SRCC) 187 x (SRCC) 13-16 EXISTING CONTRACT WITH RICHARD BORNHOLDT CONSULTING GROUP THROUGH JUNE 30, 1998, FOR A FEE NOT TO EXCEED $40,000. 5. Resolution Approving Request for Survey RESOLUTION 97-25 - of the Railroad Wye Property (RA) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE - File R-387 DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO ACCEPT A PROPOSAL FROM CSW/St2 IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $8,500 TO SURVEY PROPERTY OWNED BY UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD FOR THE PURPOSES OF PURCHASE OF THIS PROPERTY BY THE AGENCY. CONSENT CALENDAR: 6. Monthly Investment Report (Admin. Svcs.) Accepted report. SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 1 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 2 - File R-123 7. Fourth Street Sidewalk Improvements - RESOLUTION NO. 97-26 Accept Proposal From Coastland Civil RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A Engineering, Inc. to Provide Construction PROPOSAL FROM COASTLAND CIVIL Management and Construction Observation ENGINEERING, INC. TO PROVIDE Services (PW) - File R-388 x (SRCC) 11-7 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES FOR THE FOURTH STREET SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (PUBLIC WORKS) TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH COASTLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING, INC. FOR SUCH PURPOSE IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $87,400. 8. Second, Third, and "A" Streets Underground RESOLUTION NO. 97-27 - Utility District Improvements - Resolution RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE Approving Purchase Agreement, Addendum, and AGREEMENT AND ADDENDUM FOR Tenant's Consent for a Utility Easement on UTILITY EASEMENT ON PROPERTY Property Owned by Parker/Monahan, OWNED BY PARKER/MONAHAN APN 011-256-32, and Authorizing Execution (APN 011-256-32) AND of Documents (PW) - File R-385 x (SRCC) 12-14 xAUTHORIZING DIRECTOR OF (SRCC) 12-18-13 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO EXECUTE PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND ADDENDUM. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller & Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: Phillips ABSTAINING: MEMBERS: Miller (from the Minutes of the Special Joint Budget Hearing of Thursday, June 20, 1996 only, as he was not an Agency Member), and Cohen (from the Minutes of June 2, 1997 only, due to absence from meeting). The following item was removed from the Agenda for further discussion: 3. UNAPPROVED MINUTES OF REDEVELOPMENT CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF THURSDAY, JUNE 5, 1997 (RA) - File R-140 IVB Chairman Boro noted the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) had discussed producing a newsletter, and since the City is already publishing a quarterly newsletter, he felt it would be redundant. Economic Development Director Jake Ours stated the CAC was considering taking a slightly different path, perhaps providing a little more information and expanding on some of the projects the Redevelopment Agency is doing. Chairman Boro noted that if we wanted to have an article about Redevelopment we could incorporate it into the City's newsletter, with a guest column or article about Redevelopment. Mr. Ours stated he would discuss this with the CAC. Member Miller moved and Member Cohen seconded, to accept the report. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller & Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: Phillips AGENCY CONSIDERATION: 9. PROPOSAL FOR BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT (BID) TO RUN P.G.& E. PARKING LOT (RA) - File R-389 x (SRCC) 2-9-5 x (SRCC) 224 Economic Development Director Jake Ours reported the Agency had been considering the parking lot for some time, trying to figure out the best use for it. He SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 2 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 3 reported they had done a number of parking surveys, which have shown the areas to the east of the parking lot are the least used and need the most help. He noted this was also the area where many of the merchants are parking on the street, and stated the idea emerged to work with the BID (Business Improvement District) to give a benefit to BID members, and at the same time try to improve the street parking. He noted this would also work toward our goal of trying to make the BID more independent. He pointed out it would also be a very intensive, time consuming activity, as there would need to be eighty individual agreements, and he would rather have that handled by someone other than the Redevelopment Agency. Mr. Ours noted there would be no cost to the Agency, and all of the events which take place in the parking lot would continue to be held there. Chairman Boro asked if the BID had expressed an interest in doing this, and Mr. Ours reported they were very interested. Chairman Boro asked who would police the parking lot? Mr. Ours stated the patrolling would still be done by the City, and the money received in fines for violations would still come back to the City. He noted a program would be worked out in conjunction with the Police Department, similar to what we had at the lots on "C" Street, in which everyone would need to have a placard in their car that is easily identifiable, so it will be easy for the Police Department to patrol. Chairman Boro asked if, in the event the City has some future need for additional employee parking, would we be able to use that site? Mr. Ours stated we would, noting we would be very much in control of the agreement. Member Cohen stated he wanted to be certain the fly fishing exhibition and the Flea-tique are written into the lease, and will be accommodated. Mr. Ours stated this would be done. Member Cohen also pointed out there was a typographical error in the first sentence on Page 2 of the staff report, noting it should read, "The city would be reimbursed for all its costs, with any excess revenue going to the BID for its promotional events for Downtown". Member Cohen asked who would carry the liability insurance? Mr. Ours reported the BID carried liability insurance in the amount of $2 million. Mr. Cohen noted the Town of San Anselmo had this type of arrangement in place, and suggested the BID look at how they do this. He also suggested using stickers on the rear bumper of the cars, rather than placards that need to be placed somewhere in the car where they would still be visible, noting it would make it easier for the Police Officers as they patrol the lot. Member Miller noted now that the BID is no longer located at the Chamber of Commerce office, we should decide on a convenient location in town where people can obtain the stickers. Mr. Ours stated the Redevelopment Agency may also distribute the permits or stickers from its office. Member Cohen moved and Member Heller seconded, to accept the report and direct staff to negotiate an agreement with the BID for operation of the Second/Third and Lindaro parking lot. Agreement to contain a statement that the City is not limited only to the fly fishing exhibition and the Flea-tique in its use of the parking lot. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller & Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None 10. REPORT ON DOWNTOWN PLAZA PROPOSAL (RA) - File R-140 XVI Mr. Ours stated the Agency had requested staff look into some of the technical matters SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 3 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 4 involved with the plaza, and staff had checked with the Police, Fire and Public Works Departments. He noted that from their standpoint there were issues, but nothing that would indicate we could not have a plaza. He stated if a plaza were to be in place, the Police Department would like to have something simple in nature, does not offer the opportunity for someone to hide behind things, and be constructed so that when they drive by they can see the whole operation. Mr. Ours noted the Fire Department was more concerned with the sprinklers in the building and the access, which they felt was adequate, and the Public Works Department indicated traffic was their main concern, noting staff had done some checking, and it appeared that there would be almost no impact on traffic, as there are so many alternatives to that short, stub street that it would really not affect Downtown parking. Referring to the utilities, Mr. Ours stated staff did not yet know what was in the ground at that location, and this would be studied further. He reported they have met with representatives of the building owners, who would be addressing the Agency later in the meeting. Mr. Ours stated Jim Schafer, developer of the former Macy's site, is currently preparing his plans for the building, and noted the plans would allow for a plaza to be there, although his building will operate without one, should we decide not to go forward with it. Mr. Ours stated staff would like further discussion on what the plaza would look like, as Mr. Schafer would like to begin working with the Agency after his plans are submitted on June 30th. Mr. Ours noted the property owners were also very interested in staying informed, and he would like to work out a process to be able to that. Mr. Ours stated the big problem is that there is no money in any of the budgets for this project, and he does not know where the funds would come from, noting the land is the Agency's "chip" in this game. Chairman Boro clarified that at this time staff was looking for the Agency to either affirm or not affirm the plaza, and if they do affirm, staff would continue to meet with the property owners, Mr. Schafer would complete his drawings, and once the drawings are completed, the Agency would begin to look at how the plaza would operate, who would finance it, what the design would be, and so on. Mr. Ours stated that was correct. Member Heller asked if Mr. Ours had any type of estimate as to what the cost of a plaza would be? Mr. Ours stated they had no idea at this time, noting it would depend on how we decided to convert the space. By way of example, Mr. Ours reported the entryway at Albert Park was $350,000. Member Cohen noted, as discussed when this idea came forward during the public meetings regarding the Macy's site, the approach to take would be to affirm this issue now, and move forward with the understanding that we are going to create a plaza there, and that we are going to close as much of Court Street as we can. He stated we also need to work toward a design, even though it is not something we can fund at this time, noting we should be looking for a staged project, something we can do now, at minimal expense, to close Court Street off to traffic so that it becomes more of an open space. Then, the property owners on both sides, not just the former Macy's site, can be encouraged to orient those properties toward what is now going to be an open space, and perhaps through that process, and over time, we can earmark some money to do further improvements. He stated if we were to now get into anything of a significant level, such as leveling out or installing walls, it would be a significant expense; however, he believed it was important to begin the concept early in the design stage. SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 4 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 5 Member Miller stated he would rather come out with a commitment that this is going to be a plaza, and then to explore, in every way we can, how to make this a really enhanced plaza. He felt this was not the time to begin planning and designing, setting limitations because of the funding, as he believed the funding should be looked at after starting the design, otherwise funding would be a limiting factor. He stated he would prefer to see an envisioning approach rather than an incremental approach. Terrell Mason, Attorney representing Geary Market Investment Company, owners of the Courthouse Square building, noted the owners definitely want to be participants in the revitalization of Downtown San Rafael. Mr. Mason noted that while the concept of a plaza was something the owners could support, the question was whether or not this was the best location for a plaza. He noted the owners are quite concerned about the impact a plaza at this location would have on the building, and asked if the Agency had enough information at this time to determine whether this would be a positive amenity or a negative impact on the building. Mr. Mason referred to the issue of traffic flow, noting the Public Works Department's studies of traffic flow within the City do not necessarily reflect how traffic flows in and out of this building. He pointed out Bank of America has a drive -up teller driveway on Court Street, as well as an entrance to their parking structure for the tenants and customers of the bank. He stated that could be adversely affected, depending upon the design and how much of Court Street it is decided to close. Mr. Mason reported at this point the owners felt if there was going to be a plaza, they would like to retain some form of access to Fourth Street, because based on the flow of customers and tenants of the building, the owners do not want to have only one way out. Mr. Mason reported another concern is security for the area, noting they have recently retained the services of security guards to try to keep the open space area at Courthouse Square free from people hanging around on the grass, and pointing out it is not always the most positive impact for the building. He noted the same concern would apply if there was a public area adjacent to the building. Mr. Mason stated another impact to the building owners would be if there was a cost factor for these improvements, and hearing there is no money in either Redevelopment Agency or City budgets, they were concerned where the money was going to come from. Referring to fire and emergency access, Mr. Mason noted he had spoken with Fire Chief Marcucci, who stated he felt the closure of Court Street would have little or no impact on emergency and fire access because the building is sprinklered, the Fire Department does not access any of the emergency vehicles through the parking structure because of the height limitation, and fire hydrants are located on Fifth Avenue. Mr. Mason stated the concern was whether or not there would be adverse impact based on the accumulation of people who would come and go, and based on their current information, the owners were not in a position to support this plan, although they were not opposing it. He stated the owners wanted to let the Agency know that they would consider it, and would like to be involved in the planning process, and if the Agency determines to go forward with the plan, they would like to be included in the design process. Charles Brousse, resident of San Rafael, stated this was a very good start to the process of having a plaza, which was the most exciting concept to have come out of the Macy's discussions, and has caused a great deal of excitement and anticipation SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 5 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 6 of what this will do for the Downtown area. He stated he backed Member Miller's idea that there be a firm commitment to the plaza now, and it should not be put in the "iffy" category, noting a lot of press has been devoted to this issue, and a lot of people have believed in it. Mr. Brousse also believed the project should be concurrent, if possible, with the Macy's development so the entire thing could be tied together as a cohesive whole. Mr. Brousse suggested it would be advisable to have a citizens' committee working on this project for planning purposes, making it a community effort and getting the community involved in what they would like to have in the planning. He stated the community could also try to find out what the financing should be, noting there are a lot of creative ways of financing a project like this, including contributions from the community. He believed there would be many people who would contribute financially, and also felt the developer of the Macy's project should contribute, as well, as it will be an amenity for both the Macy's building and the Court Street building. He noted the concerns expressed by the owners of the Court Street building could also be considered by a citizens' committee, and recommendations could be made to the Agency. Mr. Brousse stated he hoped the Agency would move on this as soon as possible. Sharon Fox, resident of San Rafael, stated she has been discussing this project with people in the community for the past year, and one of the strongest points made by the residents was that they wanted a gathering place, noting that was always uppermost in most people's minds when asked about the Macy's building and what they would like to see there. Ms. Fox stated she would like to see a dialogue with Mr. Schafer about making this part of the Macy's project, with Mr. Schafer paying for some, or even all, of the cost, considering this was the number one priority of the public. Ms. Fox stated she would like to see a specific vision, not something that would be step-by-step. Referring to the concerns of the building owners about people hanging around, Ms. Fox stated she did not know what Mr. Schafer's building looks like at this time, but noted when the possibility of having a plaza or gathering place was first discussed, it was pointed out that when there is such an area of vitality spilling onto the street, the people we are talking about who just hang around often find another place to go, and those who want to hang on become part of the vitality. Therefore, she did not think this would become a real concern for the owners. Ms. Fox stressed that she believed a plaza should be a part of the Downtown project, and considering that Mr. Schafer is getting a very good deal in getting this property for $2.1 million, it would be nice to see him assist in the cost of this project. Kevin Warner, resident of San Rafael, stated if the City was going to pursue the idea of having a public plaza on Court Street, it was important that it be done concurrently with the Macy's site, because having the plaza amenity would definitely attract the quality of tenants we would like to see in the new space, and not having the plaza developed concurrently with the building may dissuade those quality tenants, because they are not going to want to have the street ripped up once they have moved in. Chairman Boro felt the Agency's affirmation of this issue should include a direction that staff look at putting together a citizens' advisory group to work with our agencies, and to also look for various funding sources. Member Heller pointed out we do have a Citizens Advisory Committee that works with the Redevelopment Agency, and she would like to see them have a lot of say in what the structure of the committee should look like, and to take an active part in planning this with the SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 6 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 7 community. She did not believe we needed to set up a new community committee, rather ask the CAC if they would like to establish a sub -committee, and perhaps invite members of the public, noting we already have our own vehicle of hard working people who have been actively working on projects with the City for a very long time. Chairman Boro agreed we should use the existing commissions and committees, although we should include public input right from the beginning; therefore, he directed Mr. Ours to return with recommendations for the committee. Member Cohen moved and Member Heller seconded, to affirm the concept of at least closing the southern portion of Court Street, and direct staff to meet with adjacent property owners, to make recommendations for community involvement in developing a design, and to put all efforts into finding a way to see the plaza developed concurrently with the development of the Macy's site, at least as much as we can identify funding for. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller & Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: Phillips 11. PRELIMINARY BUDGET REVIEW FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 (Admin. Svcs.) - File R-103 Administrative Services Director Ken Nordhoff reviewed a preliminary outline for the Redevelopment Agency's 1997/98 budget, and noted there were six separate Agency funds. He reported two of those are Debt Service Funds, which account for collecting tax increment and paying Principal and Interest costs on our last two bond issues done in 1992 and 1995, and he explained these funds were self-sustaining on an annual basis. He reported there is also a Low and Moderate Housing Fund, which collects 20% of the Agency's tax increment on an annual basis, and is restricted in use to dealing with housing projects, such as Lone Palm Court on "C" Street. Mr. Nordhoff stated the bulk of the budget was spread across three Capital Project Funds, explaining these funds were segregated because each is tied to a specific bond issue, one from 1992, one from 1995, and one with some older money pre -dating 1985. Mr. Nordhoff stated the budget has been put together in such a way to show both sides of the Ledger, so one can see all the expenses related to a number of Capital Projects, which total slightly in excess of $15 million. He noted most of those projects have been on the drawing board for a number of years, and have either been started recently, or are anticipated to begin next year, including such things as Andersen Drive, the Downtown sidewalk improvements, additional street lighting on the west end of Fourth Street, and a couple of undergrounding projects. Mr. Nordhoff stated at this point he anticipates the Agency's total appropriations to be in excess of $22.6 million, noting they have accounted for land sales, where appropriate, and pointing out some of that is anticipated from the Macy's site and some of the Mahon Creek acquisitions. He stated this was prepared to give the Agency some idea of what will be brought forward at the Budget Hearings for adoption. Mr. Nordhoff reported his staff has held extensive meetings with both Redevelopment and Pubic Works to review the projects and estimates, and they feel these projections are sound. He stated they had also earmarked a couple of reserves, noting they had put aside approximately $1.5 million for the Corporation Yard relocation, and also set aside some housing money to deal with the issue of the St. Vincent de Paul Dining Hall relocation, should that come to pass. SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 7 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 8 Member Cohen referred to Mr. NordhoffIs discussion of the situation the Agency will be in after June, 1998, particularly regarding staff costs, and asked if he anticipated anything in the current budget that would address this issue, or if this was something the Agency would have to work out over the next year, and address in the next year's budget? Mr. Nordhoff stated the one item in this year's budget thataddressed this issue was the fact that we have three people working on the Andersen Drive Project who are contract employees, and it is assumed that those positions will remain only until that project is completed halfway through this fiscal year. Mr. Nordhoff stated the longer-term answer is that we will have to look at alternatives, providing revenue sources to pay for some of these costs, and possibly pursuing another bond issue with the County to free up some tax increment we are entitled to but cannot receive. He noted we would also look at finding ways of making some of these costs more "demand oriented", bringing certain people in as projects come on-line. Mr. Nordhoff stated the real issue was one of matching, noting bond proceeds are a one-time financing source, while some of what is in the budget is on-going cost, so we need to find a way to better match that up. Member Cohen noted Mr. NordhoffIs recognition that we are now moving toward asking Mr. Ours and his staff to do economic development activities outside the boundaries of the Redevelopment District, and agreed it is very reasonable that we look at other revenue sources to fund those efforts. Member Cohen moved and Member Miller seconded, to accept the report as submitted. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller & Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: Phillips 12. AGENCY MEMBER REPORTS: None There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:10 PM JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Agency Secretary SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 6/16/97 Page 8