Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRA Minutes 1999-09-07SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 1 IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 1999 AT 7:30 PM Regular Meeting: Present: Albert J. Boro, Chairman San Rafael Redevelopment Agency: Paul M. Cohen, Member Barbara Heller, Member Cyr N. Miller, Member Gary O. Phillips, Member Absent: None Also Present: Rod Gould, Executive Director Gus Guinan, Assistant Agency Attorney Jeanne M. Leoncini, Agency Secretary ORAL COMMUNICATIONS OF AN URGENCY NATURE: 7:35 PM None. CONSENT CALENDAR: Member Phillips moved and Member Cohen seconded, to approve the following Consent Calendar items: ITEM RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of Monday, Minutes approved as August 16, 1999 (AS) submitted. (AS) 2. Unapproved Minutes of Citizens Advisory Committee Accepted report. Meeting of Thursday, August 12, 1999 (RA) - File R-140 IVB 3. Monthly Investment Report (RA) - File R-123 Accepted Monthly Investment Report for month ending July, 1999, as presented. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None The following item was removed from the Consent Calendar for further discussion: 4. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE OWNER PARTICIPATION, DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND FAIR, ISAAC AND COMPANY, INC. (RA) - File (SRCC) 2-7 x (SRRA) R-368 x R-405 Member Heller noted Shell Oil Company (who formerly leased a portion of the site) had refused to complete the soil testing of the site, and now the Agency must do so. She wondered whether the Agency could ask Shell to pay those costs, as they were reneging on their responsibilities? Economic Development Director Nancy Mackle stated the Agency would be working with Shell Oil Company in an effort to recoup the costs, noting it would be a matter of proof. She reported Shell was claiming the contaminants in the ground were not theirs; therefore, part of the testing would be to determine whether the material is diesel fuel, or some other kind of fuel, and then who it belonged to. SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 1 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 2 Member Heller asked that the Agency Members be informed of the outcome. Ms. Mackle stated the test results should be completed in approximately a week, and would be sent to the Regional Water Quality Control Board, who will notify the Agency as to whether anything else must be done. Member Phillips moved and Member Cohen seconded, to adopt the Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 99-28 - RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE OWNER PARTICIPATION, DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE SAN RAFAEL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND FAIR, ISAAC AND COMPANY, INC. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, Heller, Miller, Phillips & Chairman Boro NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None AGENCY CONSIDERATION: 5. APPROVAL OF CONCEPTUAL PLAN FOR RELOCATION OF SHORT SCHOOL CHILDREN'S CENTER TO ALBERT PARK (RA) - File R-140 #8 x (SRCC) 4-3-66 x 9-3-65 x 9-3- 66 Community Services Director Carlene McCart reported a team of staff has been working on the Short School relocation, including Senior Planner Katie Korzun, Assistant Recreation Director Bill Scharf, Deputy Director of Public Works Andrew Preston, and Ms. McCart. She stated they had been meeting throughout the summer to get this project on "fast track", because within two years Community Services must vacate Short School, where child care and pre-school programs are now located. Ms. McCart reported the School District had notified the Community Services Department that they needed to reopen the Short School campus for school purposes, and while they stated they would be willing to work with the City, the child care and pre-school programs would have to be relocated by the summer of 2001. Ms. McCart stated staff had looked at the options and reviewed the City's needs, and determined these programs had to remain in the Gerstle Park/Sun Valley/West End neighborhood, which is where the customer base is. She reported, according to State licensing requirements, the City needs 7,500 to 8,000 square feet of interior space in order to accommodate current enrollment, which is an average of 125 children per day. She noted there were outside requirements, as well, and staff looked for a site that would afford outside space, in order to comply with the licensing mandate. Staff was also concerned that there be accessible bus and car drop-off and pick- up space, as the majority of children, year round, get to the centers by some sort of vehicle. Ms. McCart stated staff, knowing the money would be a big concern, first looked at publicly owned property, rather than considering purchasing property and then funding a building. This narrowed their search to Albert Park and Sun Valley School. She noted that in June, staff was grateful to be chosen for a Redevelopment Agency project funding, and immediately contracted with the firm of BSA Architects to provide a conceptual plan for the child care center and pre-school on the Albert Park site. She noted staff had also closely reviewed the Sun Valley site, but they felt there was not enough room for this operation, and the number of people served would have to be reduced. In addition, the School District was concerned about another modular unit being placed on that particular school. SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 2 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 3 Ms. McCart reported staff chose BSA Architects because they have had a lot of experience with child care centers, and were very knowledgeable about State Building Codes as they apply to these types of facilities, which she noted was a very intricate process. Ms. McCart pointed out staff had also been delighted to find that the Project Manager was a Short School pre- school parent, and lives in a home overlooking Albert Park, which gave him both personal and professional perspectives. Ms. McCart stated staff had developed two schemes, one involving an addition to the San Rafael Community Center, and one involving "ground -up" construction at Albert Park. She reported the Park and Recreation Commission had held two public meetings concerning the project; the first to gather information, priorities, and the concerns of the public if the City were to relocate at the park, and the second was to review the conceptual plans, which were now being presented to the Agency, along with their recommendation. Ms. McCart reported staff had posted the plans in both Short School and at the Community Center, and had met with the Goldennaires' Club, spoken with representatives of the Bocce Federation, and Gruppo Lonatese, who are the major stakeholders in park activity, noting they had reached consensus. Reviewing the two alternatives, Ms. McCart first referred to the Community Center at Albert Park, describing the location of the parking lot off "B" Street, the Bocce Ball facility, and the stadium. The first scheme developed by staff was to add on to the Community Center. This would mean re -obligating three classrooms on the south side of the building to the proposed child care center, and actually moving the perimeter of the building out and into the park. She noted that plan also called for replacing the square footage lost for classrooms, rentals, and recreation activities, with an addition on the north side of the building, which is next to the parking lot at Safeway. The plan created a plaza in the front, provided the ability to have a separate entrance, which was important for security purposes, and would allow the use of the existing parking lot, without having to create more parking at this time. However, citing the drawbacks to this plan, she noted it interrupted the flow of the original building, and slightly decreased the amount of square footage now used for classroom space. It also called for taking out the tot area playground and some of the park. Ms. McCart stated staff was not sure how they would work parking, drop-off, and pick-up with the median in the parking lot, noting that as the parking lot is currently configured, a bus cannot be brought in, and the children would have to be off-loaded on "B" Street and walk to the Center. Ms. McCart reported staff had not developed a cost estimate for this plan, as it was not being recommended to the Agency; however, she stated the architects were of the opinion that it would be more expensive to retrofit an existing building for this plan, than it would be to actually build a new, stand-alone building. Referring to the second scheme, she noted this plan showed the child care center having an entrance off Albert Park Drive, facing onto the park. She explained it would replace the older, rather worn playground area, as well as the batting cages, which are part of the Albert Park Stadium complex. Ms. McCart stated this scheme provided several advantages. It would allow staff to design the space they will need without having to encroach upon existing space; it provides a nice, safe entry on a one-way lane, which will be sufficient for bus drop-off right at the front. In addition, there would be an opportunity to provide a play area, as mandated by State law, which could conceivably be used after hours by regular park users. It also provides the ability to install a covered play area, which has been a SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 3 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 4 concern of the parents now supporting the Short School operation. Member Cohen asked if the sizes of the buildings in each of the plans were the same? Ms. McCart stated they each had 8,000 square feet. Mr. Cohen asked if the batting cages currently saw any use, and Ms. McCart stated they saw very little use. He asked if the Seals used them, and if so, whether staff had communicated with them regarding the possibility that the batting cages would be eliminated? Ms. McCart reported she had not seen them use the cages at all this year, noting the cages were in disrepair, and were being used for storage. Member Cohen referred to parking and access, pointing out the staff report states one of issues was that there would have to be a revision to the Albert Park Master Plan. He asked if staff intended to maintain the current design of Albert Park Lane, thereby getting away from the idea of breaking it in the middle, and having two segments? Ms. McCart stated that was correct, explaining the Mahon Creek Improvement Master Plan called for Albert Park Lane to go through, and the conceptual plan was drawn to include that. She stated that would preclude staff from coming back and deciding they wanted to halve the lane, and bring in traffic from each side. Member Cohen asked if staff was comfortable that this would not be a problem with regard to accessing the site? Ms. McCart stated that would not be a problem, and noted she believed it was better in addressing the safety issue, because cars would be coming from only one side, dropping off the children, and exiting the other way, without people trying to turnaround in the middle of the street, and no two-way traffic to confuse the issue. Member Cohen asked if staff had spoken with the School District regarding bus routes, and if they had looked at the roundabout and determined whether or not buses could get through there? Ms. McCart stated she had not discussed bus routes with the School District; however, the architect had assured staff there was enough room for the bus. Mr. Cohen felt that soon they would have to have discussions with the School District regarding the changes that will be required in their bus routes, allowing them time to plan for that. Ms. McCart agreed, although she pointed out they would be very close to the existing bus route, and the proposed changes would be minor. Ms. McCart reported the Park and Recreation Commission had recommended this particular scheme, noting they appreciated the fact that it completed the park, allowed the child care center to avail itself of amenities in the park, and completed the one corner of the park that is currently in disrepair. She stated the Commission also recommended the Agency take another look at the Master Plan because this plan likely makes the basketball and volleyball courts, currently listed in the Master Plan, no longer viable. However, the group picnic area and the redesign of the Great Lawn could go forward, as stated in the Master Plan. Member Heller referred to the building itself, asking if it could be expanded in the future, if necessary? Ms. McCart stated the covered outdoor area would allow them to expand, if that was needed in the future. Chairman Boro referred to the right field line, asking if the building would impact that area, and if there would be a problem with baseballs hitting the child care center? Ms. McCart stated she had been told that would not be a problem, noting the softball field was basically used evenings and weekends. In addition, the way the building is to be faced, children would not be in the back of the building in that area. SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 4 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 5 Chairman Boro asked Ms. McCart to review the financing options. Ms. McCart reported the cost estimate was $2.5 million, and with the Agency Bond Funds and Child Care Reserves, there was a shortfall of $540,000. She stated staff needed time to develop a funding plan, noting they would not understand the actual costs until the design process is much further along. However, she believed they had a very strong "saleable" product, with a revenue -based business going into the site, and an excellent track record of fiscal management, which they hoped to carry over into plans to eliminate the shortfall. She believed that whether it be through loans, commercial or otherwise, through grants, or by leveraging the money formerly used to lease the Short School facility, they would be able to get there. Ms. McCart explained staff was now asking for approval of the conceptual plan, and direction to staff to proceed with the selection process for an architect, and to work through the funding plan. Member Phillips referred to the $54,000 currently being paid to the School District, which would not have to be paid if this project was built, noting that $54,000 would go a long way toward amortizing the shortfall. Chairman Boro pointed out there would be operating costs for the new building, which we do not currently have. Ms. McCart pointed out Community Services was already paying most of the operating costs where these facilities are now located. Chairman Boro asked staff to investigate local community bank loans, noting that for years he has heard such loans were available, but he had yet to see one come forward. He stated the local banks had supposedly consented to provide such loans, and he would like to see staff actively pursue that option. Ms. McCart stated staff had recently attended a symposium where that very topic had been discussed, and they had been assured by several lenders in attendance that they would look favorably upon these types of projects. Member Cohen noted the staff report stated parents and property owners had been invited to the Park and Recreation Commission's August meeting, and asked if that had included the Gerstle Park Neighborhood Association? Ms. McCart stated they had been included. Mr. Cohen stated he wanted to make sure that some of the people who had been active in the creation of the Albert Park Master Plan had been included, so there would not be any surprises when the Master Plan is revised. Member Cohen moved and Member Phillips seconded, to accept the Park and Recreation Commission's recommendation of Scheme B, the free-standing option; to direct staff to proceed with the selection of a project architect and negotiation of a final contract, to be returned to the Agency for approval; with staff to pursue additional funding alternatives. AYES: MEMBERS: Cohen, NOES: MEMBERS: None ABSENT: MEMBERS: None 6. AGENCY MEMBER REPORTS: None. Heller, Miller, Phillips & Chairman Boro SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 5 SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 6 There being no further business to come before the Redevelopment Agency, the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 PM. JEANNE M. LEONCINI, Agency Secretary SRRA MINUTES (Regular) 9/7/99 Page 6