Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Minutes 1992-09-09 Chairman John R. Penna M I N U T E S Boardmembers: Jack Drago Redevelopment Agency Joseph A. Fernekes Roberta Cerri Teglia Municipal Services Building --Robert Yee Community Room September 9, 1992 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN CALL TO ORDER: (Cassette No. 1) 7:08 p.m. Chairman Penna presiding. ROLL CALL: Boardmembers present: Drago, Fernekes, Teglia, Yee, and Penna. Boardmembers absent: None. AGENDA REVIEW AGENDA REVIEW Executive Director Armas stated that there were no changes to the Agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Motion to approve Minutes of the Approved. Regular Meeting of 8/12/92. __2. Motion to confirm expense claims Approved in the amount of $1,894.00. of 9/09/92. M/S Yee/Drago - To approve the Consent Calendar. Carried by unanimous voice vote. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 3. Resolution approving budget related Director of Economic & Community to the E1 Camino Real Corridor. ~-~ Development Costello stated that these were implementations of several items A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT related to the issue of moving ahead with AGENCY OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN the E1 Camino Corridor redevelopment area. FRANCISCO APPROVING THE PROPOSED She stated that last spring Council- 1992-1993 BUDGET FOR THE EL CAMINO members Fernekes and Drago had attended REDEVELOPMENT AREA many meetings working on the issue of the alignment of the BART extension 4. Resolution authorizing repayment through S.S.F. She stated that on agreement for services related to May 27, 1992 Council adopted a resolution the E1 Camino Corridor ~-¥~ to move forward expeditiously with the Redevelopment Area. establishment of a redevelopment area and to use the tax increment to help offset A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION the additional cost of a subway alignment -- OF THE REPAYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN through S.S.F. at Mission Road, Colma, and THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND Spruce Avenue. She stated that as a THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR THE EL result of that action and the hard work CAMINO CORRIDOR REDEVELOPMENT of the Subcommittee the locally preferred PROJECT alternative adopted in June by BART, MTC, 9/9/92 Page i ~GENDA ACTION TAKEN 157 and 4. Resolutions - Continued. and Samtrans included a subway Hickey Blvd. Extension, and a subway alignment Resolution authorizing a contract 5~m~ as the preferred alternative for the BART with Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. extension. for comprehensive services for the preparation of redevelopment plan She stated that the City would have for the E1Camino Corridor Project twelve months to demonstrate that we can Area. actually move ahead with this redevelop- ment area and could generate the kind of A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A CONTRACT revenue to offset the cost. She stated FOR COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES FOR THE that if the City was not successful in PREPARATION AND ADOPTION OF A doing that, the alignment will return to REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED a combination of an at-grade alignment EL CAMINO CORRIDOR PROJECT AREA and a trench alignment. She stated that if the City does move ahead with the redevelopment the at-grade alignment introduced last spring between Mission Road and Chestnut will be eliminated from further consideration, and there were several considerations that the local alternative included in response to their strong enthusiasm for a redevelopment area in the City; and the~City's willingness to offset the cost of a subway. She spoke in detail: negotiations on the City's costs wherein BART pushed hard for the City paying for the subway between Mission Rd. and the Colma City boundary for $18 million; because of moving ahead with the redevelopment area they removed the $18 million and the City's share of the cost went down from approximately $41 million to $23 million because of suc- cessful negotiations; the City had twelve months to demonstrate they were serious in setting up the redevelopment area; Samtrans and BART will be making the final decisions. She stated that staff was calling for three actions by the Agency: approve the budget for redevelopment plan adoption and the EIR; annexation of the McLellan Nursery, and the related agreements. She stated that $450,000 was to be approved that included consultants for the plan and the EIR, and $100,000 of staff work which would be a budget 9/9/92 Page 2 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN ~ 158 3. 4. & 5. Resolutions - Continued. transfer of staff costs, etc. She stated that these were the first of many items that would come forward in the next twelve months before the Council and the Agency. She stated that the Mayor was being asked to appoint two members of Council for the Committee, and two Planning Commissioners would be appointed. Boardmember Yee questioned where the $400,000+ was coming from. Director of Economic & Community Devel- opment Costello stated that Item No. 4 was the repayment agreement, and the Agency would be borrowing the funds from the General Fund with the intention that it will be a loan to the redevelopment area. She continued, assuming we find it is economically feasible to work out the technicalities and go forward it will be paid from the tax increment in the future with interest. Boardmember Yee noted that the staff report says the project area is not established and there is no revenue, and was concerned as to what factors might prevent the City from getting the project accomplished. Director of Economic & Community Devel- opment Costello stated that the City has to establish blight and that it is an economically feasible project. She stated that it may be with more detailed work that the Agency says we are not sure we want to continue or we find with the negotiations with BART that they are not as cooperative as they were last spring; or there could be legal challenge and not pursue. Boardmember Yee questioned if any opposi- tion to the project was known. Director of Economic & Community Devel- opment Costello stated that BART and Samtrans are enthusiastic, and the McLellan Nursery sees a big return for 9/9/92 Page 3 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN - 159 3. 4. & 5. Resolutions - Continued. them with the BART subway and are not objecting. Executive Director Armas related that what could create a problem is the econo- mic side - that is the creation of the development area will mean that some of the other taxing agencies will forego their tax income. He stated that that was the County, School District, and Community College who could present a formidable objection if they are unable to reach agreement on a tax sharing agreement. Executive Director Armas related: there had not been formal discussions: that the School District represents 40%, the County 25%, and Community College 15% and are major players; the City had responded to County concerns in the past by con- tinuing to receipt a tax increment for a number of years, and at a date in the future we restore their due amount; that ........ an underground subway adjacent to Los Cerritos and So. City High will be strong incentives for the School District to want to cooperate; that previous nego- tiations with the three agencies for the downtown central project had demonstrated some community wide benefits that were successful; staff had presented to the Agency what the fiscal consequences of that are in terms of meeting our obliga- tions to BART of $1.5 million per year which is a critical number. Boardmember Yee questioned at what stage would the Agency know that it should not move ahead and save the $400,000. Executive Director Armas stated that when the hearings were held to set up the boundaries, as well as hearings before the Planning Commission, any negative reactions would be known. He stated that usually objections arise when there is a fear of residential property being included in the prospect of eminent domain being proposed. He stated that 9/9/92 Page 4 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN. 160 --3. 4. & 5. Resolutions - Continued. they were excluding the home park from this area because it would be a major point of contention if it were included. He stated that there had not been any negative reactions, and the Council has made it clear to the public that the redevelopment area is critical to BART being underground. Vice Chairwoman Teglia stated that during the meetings the property owners had brought a variety of support, and the heightened sense was that it was posi- tive for the area. Director of Economic & Community Development Costello stated that the way the repayment agreement was set up, it was incremental as needed, and they would be in the negotiations with the consultants. She stated that they were assuring her that we can cut this off, and are taking the position that they will prepare us to be challenged, particularly with the other taxing agencies. M/S Teglia/Fernekes - To adopt the Resolution on Item No. 4. Amended Motion/Second Teglia/Fernekes - To adopt the Resolutions for Item No. 3, 4 and 5. RESOLUTION NO. 7-92 RESOLUTION NO. 8-92 RESOLUTION NO. 9-92 Carried by unanimous voice vote. GOOD AND WELFARE GOOD AND WELFARE No one chose to speak. CLOSED SESSION CLOSED SESSION 6. Closed Session for the purpose of The Agency chose not to hold a Closed -. the discussion of personnel mat- Session. ters, labor relations, property negotiations and litigation. 9/9/92 Page 5 AGENDA ACTION TAKEN . 161 M/S Drago/Teglia - To adjourn the meeting. Carried by unanimous voice vote. ADJOURNMENT Time of adjournment was 7:28 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, APPROVED. dohn R. Barbara A. Battaya, Cle~]( Chairman Redevelopment Agency R:dcv~lopmc~rt Agency City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco The entries of this Agency meeting show the action taken by the Redevelopment Agency to dispose of an item. Oral communications, arguments, and comments are recorded on tape. The tape and documents related to the items are on file in the Office of the City Clerk and are available for inspection, review and copying. 9/9/92 Page 6