HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 16-1979RESOLUTION NO. 16-7.9.
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL
OF A SECTION 701 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
ASS I STANCE GRANT APPL I CAT ION
WHEREAS, Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954, as amended by the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 and 1977, authorizes Comprehensive
Planning Assistance to local public agencies; and
WHEREAS, every year the State of California Office of Planning and
Research offers "701"'planning grants to various local planning agencies;.and
WHEREAS, said planning grant applications must be supported by local, ly
elected officials.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of South
--- San Francisco hereby authorizes the submittal ora "701" Comprehensive Planning
Assistance Grant application (Exhibit A) for the 1979-80 program year.
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced
and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a ._~g~ar.
meeting held on the 21s_...__~ay of _.Febru. ar.~( ..... , 197___9, by the following vote'
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAINED'
ABSENT:
~Councilmen.Em_anu, e!e .N.D. amonte, _Ter. ry J.. l~lir~r~
C,Q~lncilwon~aD Rob~ri~a Cerr_i TeQl. ia
.~o,~ncil~e~ RQnal.~ G, A~osl~a.. Wil_l_iam_A. Bo_rba
ATTEST'
PROGRAM NARRATIVE
EXHIBIT "A"
TO RESOLUTION NO. 16-79
ADOPTED 2/21/79
REDEVELOPMENT STRATEGY
AND
TAX INCREMENT ~ANCING ANALYSIS
-
CITY OF sOUTH SAN FRANCISCO PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE
ASSISTANCE GRANT 1979-80
1. Need for Project
The project area has numerous physical, circulation and land use related'
problems which have been identified in various studies. A traffic and
circulation study prepared by TJKM, traffic consultants in 1978, recom-
mended numerous improvements including over and underpasses adjacent to
Highway lO1 at East Grand Avenue and Oyster Point Boulevard, a new ar-
terial between Oyster Point Boulevard and East Grand Avenue, refinements
and improvements of the downtown circulation patterns, improvements of
various on and off ramps to Highway lO1. These circulation deficiencies
will need to be corrected during the next few years to facilitate the re-
development or rehabilitation of the entire area. However, as in most
major community development projects, there are a lack of funds and via-
ble methods to fully complete these improvements.
The area is also defined as blighted in accordance with the State Com-
munity Redevelopment Law. The area. is characterized by unfit or unsafe
structures, economic dislocation, deterioration, subdivided lots of ir-
regular form and. shape, inadequate public utilities, lack of open spaces,
depreciated property values and land which is subject to flooding.
The City Council has held numerous meetings and discussions on this matter
and has adopted a set of Goals and Objectives. which will be the framework
for remedying these problems (Resolution attached). The Council is ex- ~
pected to activate its redevelopment agency during this .Spring to develop
a redevelopment strategy and plan for the project.
Various community meetings in the industrial and downtown areas have been
held during the past year. Major financial, real estate, property owners
and other interested parties have expressed their interest in redeVelo'ping
these areas. However, 'they all indicate that a strategy needs to be for-
mulated which incorporates a redevelopment plan and assessment districts
to provide for the major public costs. An example of this interest is con-
'tained in an attached letter from Cabot, Cabot and Forbes, a major developer
of industrial properties in South San Francisco. -
An economic study by Economic Research Associates, (enclosed) was prepared
last year for the downtown portion of the'p~oject area. It briefly dis-
cussed the usefulness of using redevelopment and tax increment financing to
fund major projects such as the downtown area. They point out the effects
that Proposition 13 will have on restricting the effectiveness of this fi-
nancing. Although they conclude that Tax 'Increment Financing is not viable
1
Program Narrative
Redevelopment Strategy and Tax Increment Financing Analysis
City of South San Francisco
Proposed Comprehensive Assistance Grant 1979-80
for the downtown area, we want to show'that it is still very workable for
the industrial area, even if it cannot fund all the costs of improvements.
However, we need some very detailed analyses of the potential tax incre-
ments that could be generated from alternative land uses. It is expected
that a major industrial/commercial development in the indUstrial area could
be worth over $100,000,000 and generate nearly $1,000,000 a year, in taxes,
most of which would be tax increment since much of this land is currently
assessed at practically no value. This muCh tax increment may fund up to
.$10,000,000 of bonds, enough to provide a substantial amount of public im-
provements.
2. Project Description
A. and B. The goals and objectives of this project include'
1. To clearly define the specific development problems that. exist,
especially those which indicate this is a blighted area in ac-
cordance with California Redevelopment Law.
Tasks
. .
la.) Inventory all existing structures, utilities, streets,
land uses, etc.
lb.) To identify those problems which caused this area to
become blighted.
lc.) To assemble the major circulation problems and issues
which have been previously identified for this area.
ld.) To discuss the financing problems associated with the
implementation .of improvements.
2. To develop.a series of future land uses which will result in the
most beneficial amount of tax increment financing, yet not be en-
vironmental ly adverse.
Tasks
_ -
2a') To develop a series of land use alternatives including
combinations of industrial, commercial, office and mixed-
uses.
2b.) To identify the current costs/revenues that these various
uses generated.
2c.) To develop a system which identifies the most beneficial
combination of land uses by gaining input from various
agencies and persons.
Program Narrative
Red,ev, elopment Strategy and Tax Increment Financing Analysis
· City bf South San Francisco
Proposed Comprehensive Assistance Grant 1979-80
To develop a set of project activities which would remedy the
identified problems.
Tasks
3a.) List all possible project activities that appear appro-
priate. After citizen's input, these activities will
be refined.
3b.) These activities will be prioritized and timetables pre-
pared for implementation.
4. To formulate land use, building and site standards which accomplish
the goals and' objectives.
Tasks
4a.) All applicable existing standards from the Zoning Ordi-
nance, General Plan, Building Code, etc., will be assembled.
4b.) Other standards and ordinances from'other jurisdictions
will be requested.
5. To create a~-f~nancing program which matches various private and pub-
lic funds to finance the capital improvements.
Tasks
5a,) Identify the estimated costs of all major capital improvements.
5b.) Identify all available sources of Federal, State and Local
funds.
5c.) Calculate the amount of tax increments and bonding capacity
available to the project.
5d.) Develop a schedule which relates land development to tax
increments and bond sales to indicate the type of phasing
and sequential-developments that would be required to finance
the entire or portions of the .redevelopment plan.
·
6, To analyze the tax increment financing potential of this project.
Tasks
6a.) Each alternative land use and circulation system will have
a detailed calculation of the estimated amount of tax in-
crements.
Program Narrative
Redevelopment Strategy and Tax Increment Financing Analysis
City of South San Francisco )
Proposed Comprehensive Assistance Grant 1979-80
7. To complete a draft and a final report.
7a.) A draft report would be distributed to various citizen
groups for input.
7b.) A final report would be completed and adopted by the
City Council, Planning Commission and Redevelopment
Agency.
~ 8. Following this study, an ordinance would be prepared and a proposed
redevelopment plan adopted based on the redevelopment strategy and
tax increment financing analysis prepared in this study.
C. The specific government agencies and/or other organizations that will parti-
cipate~ include'
City of South San Francisco
Peninsula Manufacturer's Association
County of San Ma teo -
Association of Bay Area Governments
State Office of Planning and Research
United States Department of Commerce, EDA
South San Francisco Chamber of Commerce
Downtown Working Advisory Committee
Industrial Area Property Owners
D. This project will implement a number of "701 objectives" including but not
1 imi ted to the fol 1 owing:
To Conserve and Revitalize Communities
..~ ._ _ _,__ · .... ~ ..... .
This project helps develop'a comprehensive strategy to conserve and rehabili-
tate °a deteriorated business area within our community. It will assist de-
velopers to create programs for private land clearance and assembling of sites
in a distressed area. It meets the intent of the Urban Development Strategy
by promoting.theinfilling of an urban'area. It will emphasize major capital
improvement programs iN an existing urban area.
To. Promo.te E~cg.npm_iF_ De_vel0Pmeg_t ~pp_o_rtuni~tj/
..
This strategy will promote economic benefits in the communityj especially for
low and moderate income residents. It will assist-the City in capturing tax
increments to fund some major capital projects~without adversely affecting the
local tax base. It will help determine the future long-term viability of
Tax Increment financing for redevelopment projects. The activities will slow
the flight of industry from the community by providing new incentives to lo-
cate in the area. This project will help implement the General Plan, the
City's Circulation and Transportation Element and its Capital Improvement Pro-
gram. This project will be especially beneficial to other communities in the
Program Narrative
Redevelopment Strategy and Tax Increment Financing Analysis
City of South San Francisco
Proposed Comprehensive Assistance Grant 1979-80
State since it will relate its strategy to the new limitation on re-
development projects iniposed by Proposition 13.
To Promote Orderly Growth
--
As the vacant lands in South San Francisco vanish, revitalization and re-
development of existing areas will become of prime concern. This project
will promote orderly growth by improving services in a distressed area,
by coordinating various land uses and by.creating a strategy to implement
adoption of capital ·improvement policies.
E. This project will be solely administered by the City of South San Francisco
and ABAG's role will only be advisory.
3. Products and Results of Project
. ~ -
This project will result in an adopted Red.evelopment Ordinance and Plan which
will finance community development-activities.for many years. This redevelop-
ment ordinance is necessary for the Agency to capture the tax increments and
have the legal authority to implement the program activities. Each one of the
needs identified will be addressed in the ordinance and the solutions will be
authorized by law. These products will be implemented by the City Council,
Planning Commission~~ Redevelopment Agency and Advisory Committee.
4. Project Evaluation
....
This proposed project is consistent with the Three Year Regional Goals and Pro-
gram Statement 197.3-76., as published by the Association of Bay Area Gove~-n-men~s.
The major· goa'ls--that it will help meet include the following'
A. Tg. Imprgve t_he Qua] its. of _L.i_f.e_ in. _the BaS Ar.e_a
To increase socioeconomic well-being while protecting the splendid physical
and environmental quality of the area. As a result of this analysis, the
quality of life'in the project area, the City of South San'Francisco and
this portion of the Bay Area will significantly improve since many of the
economic and land use problems in this'area will be resolved. Employment
opportunities will increase, commercial sales will improve and the area will
become more economically viable.
B. To Solve Environmental Problems
~ ~ - _ .. - _
·
This project will be consistent with ABAG's Environmental Management Plan
'recently completed for the Bay Area. Surface run-off problems will be re-
solved, better sewer capacity prov.ided, air quality issues addressed and
various other concerns-remedied by the Plan.
Program Narrative
Redevelopment' Strategy and Tax Increment Financing Analysis
City of SouthlSan Francisco
P.roposed Comprehensive Assistance Grant 1979-80
C. To Identify Industrial Sites in the Bay Area
This project wil1 be consistent with ABAG's industrial siti.ng project which
included an inventory of those sites available for.large, regionally signi-
ficant information. This project,'in accordance with ABAG's objectives,
will provide industry with more certain and specific information about what
they can expect if they locate in South San Francisco.
Attached are some recent studies and reports which will further help to describe'this
project.
_-_ /
· ~ ·
CANT Ci_ty of South San Frhncisco '
PROJECT~ T)TLE: Redevelopment Strate§½ a~d Tax
= OJECT I~iRECTOR: William Costanz0
·
·
. !
.,.~DRESS: t t 400 Grand ~venue
..
ZiP CODE- 9z~080 '
ASSEMBLY DISTRICT:' l~
GRANT ·REQUESTED- $ 30,.00Q'
LOCAL MATCH' $ 15,000
·
·
TOTAL COST: $45,000
COUNTY: San Mateo
In'crment F{nanc~ng Analysis
TITLE: City Planner '.'
·
·
·
CITY: Sou'~h San Franr. i~co
PHONE: (415)873-8000 Ext.- 246
; .
STATE SENATE DISTRICT: 6th
HAS JURISDICTION PREVIOUSLY
RECEIVED 701 GRANT?
Yes ~-J No [--J
LAND USE AND HOUSING
ELEMENTS SUBMITTED'
FOR CERTIFICATION?
Yes [~1 NoJ~]
APPLICANT CATEGORY.:
STATUS OF GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS:.
'Local Assistance[~[~
Non-Metro COG O
Date Adopted
Housing 7-?1-6g
'Open Sp~ce 1- ?: 10=_7_3_
Land Use 4'-21-6g
Conservation 1 2-1 0-73
Circulation 4-21-69
Da~e Adopted
Seismic.Safety 9- 22:7"5
No i se 9-22-75 '
Scenic Highway 9-22-75 "
Safety 9-22-75
Other
PLANN! NG AND MANAGEMENT CAPACITY'
o.
Advance Planning 1978-79 Budget- $94,655
Current Size of Professional Planning Staff' 3'-
% of 701 'Work to be Performed by Local Staff: R0%
LIST MAJOR STUD1ES UNDERTAKEN
.
e
IN 1977-78' ;' '
. , ! .- ;.
General Plan Upda e ' . · - ,
·
:
Specific 'Plan'No. 2 '(CommerCial, Residenti~al ,'Offi.c[ PUD)-
· o
Downtown .Revitalization .Sthdy. :' .":
PLANNING AREA STATISTICS '
o.
Jurisdiction's 1970 .Population 46,706
·
1970 Minori.ty Population .11;429
-' '~70 Average 'PerSona ] Income 12,11 ] '
78 Assessed Valuat'ion ~ '38__0,61'1,~323 ~
· !
Present Estimated Population 4~9,287(e~t.i
Present Minority Population 12,100(.est;.)
1978 Average Persona] Income 17,500(est.0
-1978-79 Annual Jurisdiction 1.3;198,062 ;
Budget ·
SIGNATURE-
TITLE-.
Ci. ty' Manager
Chief Executive Officer
NAME- C. Walter Birkelo DATE·
f~, Ief. t of dotted It~e.
FEDERAL GRANT APPLICATION/AWARD NOTIFICATION
STATE OF CALIFORNIA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE (916) 445-0613
..~'~-C-~.N1 -'-- Organizational Unil -- 4. ADDRESS - Sf,"¢'. 0¢ P. 0. Bo.
APPLICATION DA'~E yr mo
,9 _79__ 2 21
FED£RAL EMPLOYER ID NC
City of South San Francisco "._P._Q_~]tQx 7l]_ 94-6000435
'-'~' ~ f 6. COUNTY 7. STATE 8. ZIP CODE 9. PROO TII LEINO. (Catalog o! Fed Domest,c A~sistanc,
i So. San Francisco San M~-~eo CA 94080. 14203 Comp.--Plan. Assistance
. ..
ilo. ~V~E, oF ACT,ON ,,.*YPE OF C--ANG~ (Com.,.te ~,~10~-o, ,O= ~,, c~ec~:~ ~. .
:,~ .~,.~ , .~ ~o~,,..,,on . [] ,nc...,.~ Do,a,, .~'C] ,nc,..,-~ ~u..,,on · D O,,,.r S~oo. C,~.j.. .
· ; yr mo 19. APPLICANT TYPE Enter Letter [~ FUN,OS REOU£SY'EOIFo, Cna,~y..$$~ow O,~lv. .4'~t
Jj IS. R E ~uESTE C) FUND START 1979-_7_ A. S,a,, F. S:hoo, O.,,,:, :,o ,,=,=o~,,.,,,. i/s_3_O_~O00 ....
'16 FU~*gS DURATION ..~{Month$) B. Interstate · G. Community Action Agency. 27 .STATE [ ) $ __ __
·
: yr mo C. Sub State D.$t H. Sponsored Organizatio, 22 £0C~ t )$ 15,000
·
11.ESt. PROJECT START 19__79 7 D. Coun,v ,. ,n.~an ~ O~.£. t / S--
i · _45+Q6
18. ES . PROJECT DURATION ._.~_{Months) E. C,ty J. Other {SPecify in Rernarksl 24 TOTAL. t20. 27. 22. 2JI ( ) ,~
·
25. BRIEF :TITLE OF
iAPPLICANT'$ PROJECTRedeveloPment Strategy and Tax Increment Financing Analysis
.~. ~ ..........
26. DE CRIPTION OF APPLICANT:S PROJECT.(Purpose)
i ^ redevelopment strategy designed to identify the obstacles and solutions necessary to de-
i' velop the blighted industrial and commercial areas of South San Francisco. 'Also 'it }till
:analyze the post-Propos'it.ion 13 effects on lax Increment F.inancing to fund a proposed
i' redevelopment project.
27. ARiEA OF PROJECT IMPACT (Indicate C~ty, County, S}~te, etc.)[ " ' STA-TE. COU~'~-~-:T--M-0-~-
, WIDE WIOF' I COUN.
· 123
,'City of South San Frar~cisco, San Mateo County CA .. ¥~rn ~ ¥,,~
'28. CO~IGRESS. JONA~ DISTRICT 29. Environmental Assessment Required 30. CLEARINGHOUSEJS) TO WHICH SUBMITTED
.~C;:U[ Applicant Districts Impacted By Project By State/Federal Agency? [--]Yes
ll ] [ ] ~No a~State b I~AreaWide cl~one
31.
AME/'rlTLE OF CONTACT PERSON b ADDRESS --Street or P. O. Box c ILL'Pi-lONE NO.
: W~ll.iam Costan~o, C.ity Planner ' P.0. Box 711~ $o~h San Franc'isco CA 94080{415)87~3-870
31. d i~; ENVI~RONMENTAL DOCUMENT REVIEW REOUIRED YES I-~ NO iX} e Will the project require h If project is physical in natur_ or r~qu~res-
If. Yes L_I Environmental Imrmct Statement (Report) Attached (20 copies) relocation? environmental document, list th~ U.S.
: [] DraftEIR [] FinalEIR _, YES ["--I NO F-] Geologic Survey Ouadrang;e map in which
[~ Negative Declaration Attached (20 copies) f Doe~ your agency have a project i$
' civil rights affirmative
, ° None attached - Document Will Be Forwarded .On action policy and plan? '
,f' Approximately ~ 30 80 YES r-I. NO r-i
- .
, / Man Day Year § I$ project covered by
If, ~o ~] Federal Pro§ram Does Not Require An F:nuironmental Document ~-~5 Pt IV?
00 ~ ~roiect Exempt Under State Categorical FxemptiOno Clas~ .' I[ ¥e$.¥~is ff']'Mo~NOe×ecutcxt .i'-3
! '
' ITEMS 32-38 TO BE COMPLETED BY CLEARINGHOUSE
'! MULTIPLE I
32. CLEARINGHOUSE ID [] CLEARINGHOUSE
,
· VIEW OF
. .
~ J~]Notification OWith Comment [~J Wai~ed 34. STATE APPLICATION
a ~ ,DENT,F,ER (SA,, :CiA J Il Il J_]_
I~J~JAl:)plication b OWithoutCommen! d ~Unfavorable J State Number
· -
·
: STATE WI'DE Countg/ City County/ 'City County/ Cmtv County/ C,ty County/ City County/ City
35. CLEARINGHOUSE Ping Area Ping Area Ping Area Ping Area Ping Area Ping Area
36. STATE PLAN REQUIRED ' 31. RECEIVING DATE vr ,no oa'¢ 3~ a SIGNATURE OF CH OFFICIAL
: AT CLEARINGHOU. SE 19 . '
!
" F-'-I Yes [~] No 38. FINAL CH ACTION DATE - vr mo oar
' 19
--
ITEMS 39-42 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICAN~ BEFORE SENC)~NO FORM TO FE DE RAL AGE,%CY
!
39 ,~TIFICATION -- The applicant certifies that to the best of his knowledge and belief the above data are true and ,Check box if clearinghouse '--
: correct and filing of this form has been duly authorized by the governing body of the apolicant. ,response is attached.
~-~ lAME (Print or Type) b TITLE ' c SIGNATURE of Authorized Representative d TELEPHONE NUME~ER
41. D~TE MAILED TO FEDERAL/STATE AGENCY yr mo day 4:2. NAME OF FEDERAL / STATE AGENCY
i
', 19__ TO WHICH THIS APPLICATION SUBMITTED
!
ITEMS 43-54 TO BE COMPLETED 8Y FEDERAL OFFICE-EVALUATING AND RECOMMENDING ACTION Crc TH£
yr mo clay vr ,~.u d.,v ays Compl j
19 %$3aOR b /
43. GI~ANT APP. LICATIO.N ID
' ~{A$,igned by Federal Agency)
·
·
45. O6GANIZATIONAL UNIT
.
·
46. AI~)MINISTE RING OFFICE
!
:
·
47. A~ORE$$ -- Stree~ or P. O.
·
R
E
V
I
S
I
0
N
S
Amended Apphc.
Received
· . yr mo day
19
19
19
48. CITY
19
-
Rev. E ~p,'~',:~: 54. E xp Act,on R J '~.~,,-. ...... ,,t ~.:
R
Act,,~,~ D.,t,? Revised J App,.c
E As Of E
V V
J Vr ,~o el,iv Vr mo d3y J
S S
I ~9 __ ~9' __ I
0 ,~ ~9 0
N '
--~ S ~__ ~9.. . S i,u .... ,~_
!
49. STATE 50. ZiP COD~ 51. TE-LEP~O~UMBER
i
--~-I~. A L ACTION
P ' 55. -~ ~Z1A ..... I~d
.
56. F~ND5 AVAILABLE
57. E~DING DATE
i
ITFM.~ .r)5 b5 [O BL CL)LtI'L! -r| l_) l~Y THE r[-O~ Jl-\L ()FF ICi..%PPHL)VIN(; lJl~ (;H.~,. ! Ai'~'I I(;AI I{J,~i
FINAL OATE$ yr mo day
C [-] W,U,d,dw,, 19 /
19
19
TOTAL 160. 61. 62. 671
'.*: I T .'- · >"(* ,¢~-,'.~ L'","
FUIVDS AP?ROV~-~) [fCor.Chd,ges Show Only Arnr. of Inc. I*) or Dec.
60. FEDERAL AMOUNT ['F Y. funds) [ /$
6I. STATE SHARE / ) $
62. LOCAL SHARE [ )$
63. OTHER ( I$