HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCDC Minutes 08/17/1987MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING
PETALUMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
MONDAY, AUGUST 17, 1987
ROLL: 3:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Balshaw, Cavanagh, Davis, Tencer, Vice Chairman Woolsey
Chairman Hilligoss
ABSENT: Sobel
RESO. 87-8
REDEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY
Mike Moore spoke to the Commission regarding the boundaries of the new
redevelopment project and advised that the Commissions action today is
the next procedural step in establishing the redevelopment area. In
March, 1987, the Petaluma Community Development Commission authorized
the adoption of a redevelopment survey area. The redevelopment
consultant has accessed the area for all of the necessary qualities that
have to be contained in the redevelopment area as far as the ratio of
urbanized, to vacant land, and the 'blighted conditions' that exist in the
area. The consultant has determined that the area as outlined in the
map is of an adequate size and meets all of the qualifications for being
designated as a redevelopment area. Mr. Moore advised that with the
adoption of this resolution the Commission also authorizes the consultants
and staff to begin work on the actual redevelopment plan and all the
necessary support documentation.
The question was raised as to when property owners in this area would
be able to add their input, and as assured by Mike Moore, workshops
would be held by the redevelopment consultants in association with staff,
and public meetings would be held sometime in October, 1987. All
property owners will be notified.
There was concern for the potential sensitivity with regards to City
city property owners who may dispute being included but also the fact
that there are a large number of county property owners involved.
Contact has been made with Supervisor Harberson county staff members
to discuss this.
Mike Moore also advised the Commission that by adopting this resolution
it does not give the Commission the ability to condemn properties, but
could be set forth in the Redevelopment Plan if it is the Commissions
desire to do so. One of the reasons for setting up a redevelopment area
is financing the condemnation aspect of it. The Downtown
Redevelopment Plan does not contain a condemnation provision which was
at the request of the Council, but it is actually covered by the
Redevelopment Plan itself. This action is certifying the new
redevelopment area and authorizing the consultants and staff to proceed
with preparation of the plan.
The Redevelopment Plan itself is a legal and financial mechanism that
allows the City acting as a Redevelopment Agency to do more things
than it can as a City Council as far as acquiring properties, combining
properties, and condemning properties. The Redevelopment Plan will not
be a substitute for the General Plan or for any specific plans that are
designated for portions of this redevelopment area. As far as any land
use decisions, the General Plan is still the City's guiding policy and if
and when a specific plan is done for that area that will implement the
General Plan and the Redevelopment Plan as another aspect of that
implementation.
The new area would be called the Petaluma Community Development
Project.
Mike Moore added, that if a property owner on the edge of the map does
not want to be included in the area they could be excluded. The
Commission has the opportunity to make changes in the boundary area,
however, if there are changes to be made the procedure essentially has
to start all over again. Those changes should be made prior to adopting
the resolution.
Commission Member Jack Cavanagh questioned Assistant City Attorney
Rich Rudnansky, in regards to his property which would be contained in
that area and if he should vote on the resolution. He was advised that
there would be no conflict.
Mr. Rudnansky added that if you are not within the redevelopment area
you would not be gaining any economic interest so therefore, you could
vote. Generally any time there is a new deposition occurs and there is
a conflict, the conflict can be waived and that party can vote.
Reso. 87-8 Approving the proposed Redevelopment Project Area
Boundaries, directing staff to prepare the Redevelopment Plan, the
Redevelopment Plan Report, Environmental documents, the draft EIR and
approving certain transmittals and filings.
Introduced by John Balshaw, seconded by Larry Tencer.
AYES: Balshaw, Cavanagh, Davis, Tencer, Vice Chairman Woolsey,
Chairman Hilligoss
NOES: 0
ABSENT: Sobel
PERMIT PARKING
Gene Beatty brought back to the Commission a report on the Permit
Parking Program for the Keller Street Garage and the A Street Parking
lot. During the few months the program has been in effect there has
been one (1) permit issued for the garage and have had no interest
expressed for the A Street parking lot. Some members of the Main
Street Association felt it was not necessary to have permitted spaces and
indicated that it did conflict at times with certain events such as the
Sidewalk Sales and the recent River Festival at which time they asked us
to cover up the unused portions of the permit parking so the general
public could use it.
Bill Gabbert of the Downtown Merchants Association, advised that the
board of directors does not object to removing the permit parking zones
if that is the Commissions desire, however, they would not object if we
wanted to modify the plan. Instead of having permitted spaces
indicated, long term parking permits could be issued and put in the
vehicle window to indicate a permit was issued and is excluded from the
time zone.
The main concern of the downtown merchants was the fact that spaces
were reserved and no one was using them. If the City were to go to
the long term parking, it is the downtown merchants request that we
erase the permit parking portions of the garage and the parking lot.
It was the consensus of the Commission to do away with the permitted
spaces and offer permit parking on a demand basis. To leave the same
number of spaces being twenty-five (25) in the garage, but not issue
long term permits for more than what we have provided for, and if there
is no interest shown anyone can use those spaces. Permits would be
issued for a vehicle and if the demand outweighs the available spaces it
would be brought back to the Commission to ask for an increase or
adjustment in the number of spaces available.
KELLER GARAGE SIGNS
Mike Moore addressed the Commission with regards to adding signs to
the Keller Street Garage at the request of the Downtown Merchants
Association. Because there are no signs at the present time it is felt
that visitors to our City do not know there is a public garage. We have
been in touch with the architect for the garage and asked him to advise
us on the size of lettering, the style, the material the letters would be
made out of along with prices. This information would be brought back
to the Commission in a more formal proposal. Scott Architectural
Graphics in Santa Rose has also been contacted and will also provide
prices and details.
It is the consensus of the Commission to install a sign reading 'public
parking' over the Keller Street entrance and 'directional signs' at
various locations.
Vice Mayor Woolsey expressed her feelings with regards to the 'Exit'
sign as you come down from the top two tiers. It is hidden behind a
beam and cannot be seen. She also feels if there is an emergency it can
be dangerous and that the sign should be dropped or moved so it is
more visible.
There was also concern regarding the
garage. The Commission was assured
the height of vehicles that can enter.
The meeting was adjourned
ATTEST:
ecording Secretary Patricia E. Bernar
height of vehicles entering the
there are clearance signs stating