Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCDC Minutes 06/12/1978MINUTES OF MEETING-` PETALUMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 12, 1978 REGULAR MEETING The Regular Meeting of the Petaluma Community Development Commission was called_ to order by Chairman Helen Putnam at 4:10 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Balshaw, Bond, Cavanagh, Harberson*, Perry and Chairman Putnam. Absent: Commissioner Hilligoss. *Commissioner Harberson arrived at 5:06 p.m. PRELIMINARY REPORT Before City Engineer David Young reviewed the document, GOLDEN CONCOURSE prepared by.DeLeuw Cather, he asked the Commission to PARKING STRUCTURE look at the projected cost figures contained in Page 21 FEASIBILITY STUDY of the report. The question of funding the project was discussed, in view of the passage of Proposition 13. Finance Director John Scharer stated the Commission would be looking at an entirely new picture as far as financing is concerned. At this time, it is not known what effect Proposition 13 will have on parking authorities, revenue bonds, or tax increment revenue. It is known tax revenue will be reduced by two-thirds. But the question remains whether there will be any revenue at all. Comm. Balshaw questioned whether the parking structure, under the circumstances, could become a reality. Mr. Young reviewed the various alternatives: (1) expanding the existing parking lot to increase the number of spaces by 20, at.a cost of $50,000; (2) a three sloping floor structure yielding 255.additional spaces.at a cost of $1,683,000; (3) two sloping floors yielding 125 additional spaces..at a cost of $1,140,000; and, (4) a two-level.deck with ramp, which would -add -107 spaces and cost $977,000. Mr. Young stated the last alternative would not. -be -practical if at some future date a third deck was to be added. Aesthetics were an area of concern- The engineer -and the architect were given some guidance, for the purpose.of_the-report, to -assume an amount of approxi- mately $75,000 for an aesthetic treatment. During.the past week, Mr. Pruitt, the consulting architect with DeLeuw Cather, brought in two sketches which would allow more room for tree planting along_Western Avenue and additional landscaping between the structure and.the drug store. Stone work would be added to some areas of tfi6­Eacade, and an overhanging planter would be con- structed on the rim of the building. This work.could not be accomplished with the cost figures contained in the report. Mr. Young..,stated another detrimental effect would be the loss of parking spaces, and he estimates 16 spaces would be eliminated. The loss of spaces would add to the cost of the structure. He did state, however, in order for the structure not to dominate the downtown area, it would have to be tastefully done. Finally, the report indicates the best way to control parking would be by the installation of parking meters. Methods of financing were discussed by the Commission. Mr. Meyer indicated he felt, the structure would have to be built by means of a parking assessment district, which would include the present parking district boundaries. It is not clear, at this point, whether or not assessment.districts can be formed under the provisions of Proposition 13. Comm. Balshaw stated he felt the people.in the parking district should be given an opportunity to say whether or not they would be willing to form an assessment district. Chairman Putnam indicated she was not going.to rule out the fact the structure could be.built by private developers. General Counsel Larry Klose stated the people in the area would have ample opportunity to speak to the issue in public hearings, and they may have the June 12, 1978 PRELIMINARY REPORT right to vote on the formation of an assessment GOLDEN CONCOURSE district. PARKING STRUCTURE FEASIBILITY STUDY Finance Director John Scharer suggested the report be (Continued) given to the Project Area Committee, as well as the Parking Committee, of which Fred Mattei is Chairman, to determine if there would be some interest in financing the project. Comm. Balshaw also stated the City, at this time, has no completed plans and if EDA funds would become available, he felt the Commission or the Council should set some type of priority. The Commission took no action on the matter and asked Mr. Scharer to refer copies of the report to the Project Area Committee and the Downtown Merchants' Parking Committee. LETTER FROM A letter dated May 18, 1978, addressed to the Commis - HISTORICAL sion and signed by Jeff Harriman and Wallace Lourdeaux, RESTORATION AND was read by the Recording Secretary and ordered filed. DEVELOPMENT CO RE RESPONSIBILITIES One of the requests in the letter was to give the OF PROJECT AREA COMM. Project Area Committee the responsibility of being the negotiating arm of the Community Development; Commission, to seek out owner -participation agreements. Mr. Richard Lieb, Chairman of the Project Area Committee, commented briefly. He felt there could be a conflict of interest,.as most of the members on the Project Area Committee either own property or are in business in the area. General Counsel Larry Klose stated he would have to research the propriety of delegating a final decision-making power to the PAC regarding the disbursement of funds. Discussion was held regarding the number of members in the Project Area Com- mittee. It was felt there should be a larger membership and that more people in the Project Area should be encouraged to actively participate. Mr. Lourdeaux felt, regardless of the size of the Committee, they should go to the business community and seek projects.for the Commission's consideration. He also stated, of the three projects approved by the Commission at the last meeting, only one had been discussed by the PAC.. Mr...Scharer indicated two of the projects were referred to the Commission by the PAC, i.e., the Golden Concourse and the beautification in and around the McNear building. Executive Director Robert Meyer stated the improvement of the storm drain situation in the vicinity of "C" Street and Petaluma Blvd. would not only improve the property where the proposed Ramati.ci building is to be constructed, but it will improve pedestrian circulation in the.entire area. He also pointed out this would save City manpower in the rainy season, whereas the beautifi- cation project would require some additional man hours for maintenance. General Counsel Larry Klose stated as far as owner -participation agreements are concerned, they cannot be completed for any of the projects until the Commis- sion has the cost of the projects to incorporate into the agreement. Jeff Harriman indicated there are probably other property owners in the down- town area who would like to do improvements and enter into owner -participation agreements, but the Commission has committed the entire $86,000 available to three projects. Mr. Harriman stated if the Project Area Committee had been aware in November or December this amount of money would have been available,. they could have actively sought other projects as visualized in the Redevelop- ment Plan. Mr. Scharer pointed out this is the first year the Agency has received any funds, and under the provisions of Proposition 13, it is not sure what the funding will be for the next year. He did expect, though, that it would be approximately $55,000. -2- June 12, 1978 LETTER FROM Chairman Putnam stated it did not appear the Commission I91STORICAL would have an answer at this meeting to Mr. Harriman's RESTORATION AND... and Mr. Lourdeaux's letter. She asked Mr. Klose to DEVELOPMENT CO. research the.matter of the limitations of the Project RE RESPONSIBILITIES Area Committee and prepare a report, a copy of which OF PROJECT AREA COMM. would go to Mr. Lourdeaux and Mr. Harriman. (Continued) Mr. Harriman also questioned the status of their owner - participation agreement. Fred Tarr indicated the figures still need to be received from P.G.& E. before the agreement can be completed. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Commission, the Meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m. Attest: j- Recor ing Secretary -3- Chairman