Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRA Minutes 1998-09-08SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/8/98 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1998 AT 7:45 PM Regular Meeting: Present: Gary O. Phillips, Vice -Chairman San Rafael Redevelopment Agency: Paul M. Cohen, Member Barbara Heller, Member Cyr N. Miller, Member Absent: Albert J. Boro, Chairman Also Present: Rod Gould, Executive Director Gary T. Ragghianti, Agency Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, Agency Secretary CLOSED SESSION - 7:00 PM None ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: PM None CONSENT CALENDAR VA&Ti] Member Miller moved and Member Cohen seconded, to approve the following Consent Calendar items: ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of Approved as submitted. Monday, August 17, 1998 (AS) 2. Monthly Investment Report (MS) Accepted report. - File R-123 AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, & Vice -Chairman Phillips NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: Chairman Boro DISQUALIFIED: MEMBERS: Cohen (from minutes of the meeting of 8/17/98 only, due to absence from meeting). PUBLIC HEARING: 3. PUBLIC HEARING - TO REVIEW THE CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FIVE-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 1995/96 - 2000/01 AT THE MID-TERM PERIOD AND APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS (RA) - File R-140 XVI X (SRCC) 140 Vice -Chairman Phillips declared the public hearing opened. Economic Development Director Jake Ours clarified there were two reports being presented this evening: one was the Implementation Plan, which is a report on what the Redevelopment Agency has been doing; and the second was the Plan itself, which describes how the Agency does things, and will be doing things in the future. Mr. Ours explained Senior Planner Katie Korzun would be giving the first report during the regular Redevelopment Agency meeting, and Senior Development Specialist Nancy Mackle would give the second report during a Special Joint Public Hearing between the Agency and SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/8/98 Page 1 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/8/98 Page 2 the City Council, which would begin following the Regular Agency meeting. Senior Planner Katie Korzun explained the Five -Year Implementation Plan was required by the State of California, in which the Agency states what it is going to do during that five year period. In addition, half -way through the five years, the Agency must evaluate how well it has done and, if necessary, change what it is doing. Ms. Korzun stated the Agency first adopted the current plan in 1995, made changes in 1996, and was now at the mid -point, reviewing how the Agency is doing. She noted the attached Summary listed all of the projects and programs the Agency is working on, showing those that have already been completed. She reported there had been substantial progress on most of the projects, pointing out more than 50% of the projects were completed, while a number of them were ongoing items. Ms. Korzun stated staff had decided changes were needed in three areas. The first is in the magnitude of the remaining drainage needs. She stated they had hoped to be able to solve most of the drainage problems on West Francisco Boulevard, and in East San Rafael; however, they have found they are not going to be able to do that, and have, therefore, cut back the scope of those projects to reflect what the Agency really can do. The second change is the addition of a few recent opportunities that have arisen, such as Macy's. Third, and possibly most important, Ms. Korzun reported there was new emphasis on the Canal area, which had changed somewhat since the forming of the Agency twenty-six years ago. She stated that with the remaining time, both with the current Implementation Plan and the overall Agency timeline, the Agency would be placing more emphasis on the Canal, as most of the projects Downtown have been completed, and the Agency is scaling back on the drainage issue. Ms. Korzun stated it was staff's assumption that every five years they would, hopefully, be doing a Five -Year Implementation Plan, noting they would likely be coming back in 2000 or early 2001 with another five-year projection of what the Agency is going to do, and where. Vice -Chairman Phillips complimented Redevelopment Agency staff for all the work they have done, and something the Agency Members heard comments on, almost daily. He stated the comments have been extremely positive, noting it really was an exciting time, and the Agency staff deserves a lot of credit. Member Heller referred to the State Land Funds, noting the report indicated they were no longer shown as Agency Funds. She asked if the Agency still had access to these funds if we needed them, and where the funds had gone? Mr. Ours reported the funds were still here, but they were considered "City" funds, rather than "Redevelopment Agency" funds, reporting they had inadvertently been rolled into the last Plan as Redevelopment Agency funds, when they were actually an account of the City. Vice -Chairman Phillips referred to Attachment "A", which listed Ongoing Planting and General Improvements, and asked what staff's plans were for Ongoing Planting? Mr. Ours explained the Agency did a lot of planting every year, with flowers on the corners, and maintaining and replanting the trees when necessary, noting this was actually a promotion of Downtown, rather than a maintenance of Downtown. There being no public comment, Vice -Chairman Phillips closed the public hearing. SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/8/98 Page 2 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/8/98 Page 3 Member Cohen noted there was a lot of debate, particularly in Sacramento, about the nature and worthiness of Redevelopment Agencies, and Redevelopment Law in general; however, he had often stated that Redevelopment Law was the one area left to local governments where they could be proactive, and he felt Mr. Ours and his staff had done a tremendous job of demonstrating that. Mr. Cohen believed anyone who looked at San Rafael had to realize the benefit to local government of having the tools an active Redevelopment Agency gives us, noting Mr. Ours and his staff had demonstrated how to use those tools as craftsmen. Mr. Cohen noted there were some in Marin County who persist in thinking these things would have happened anyway, even though we all know that not to be true; however, he believed that every once in a while it was good to "toot your own horn", and state that these things happened because there were people who had a vision, and turned it into reality. Again, he expressed his appreciation for the hard work staff has done. Member Cohen moved and Member Miller seconded, to adopt the Resolution accepting the review of the Central San Rafael Redevelopment Project Area Five -Year Implementation Plan, and approving the amendments. RESOLUTION NO. 98-31 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE REVIEW OF THE CENTRAL SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA FIVE-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 1995/96 THROUGH 2000/2001 AT THE MID-TERM PERIOD AND APPROVING AMENDMENTS. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller & Vice -Chairman Phillips NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: Chairman Boro 4. AGENCY REPORTS: None. There being no further business to come before the Redevelopment Agency, the meeting was adjourned at 7:55 PM. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Agency Secretary SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/8/98 Page 3