Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCDC Minutes 03/01/1976CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES ADDITIONAL MEMBERS -- PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE PMC RRS #7 REVISED TIMETABLE -- PROJECT AREA PLAN PETALUMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Minutes of Regular Meeting March 1, 1976 The regular meeting of the Petaluma Community,Development Commission was called to order by Chairman Helen Putnam at the hour of 4:00 p.m. Present: Commissioners Brunner, Cavanagh, Hilligoss, Mattei, and ,Chairman Putnam. Absent: Commissioners Harberson and Perry. The minutes of the regular meeting of the Petaluma Com- munity Development Commission dated February 2, 1976, were approved as recorded. The Secretary pointed out two typographical errors in the minutes which would be corrected. PCDC Resolution #7 approving additional members to the Project Area Committee, and appointing Skip Sommer, Harry Sackrider, and Water Rieckhefer, to the Project Area Committee, was approved by 5 affirmative and 2 absentee votes. A copy of the revised timetable for the Redevelopment Plan was submitted to the Recording Secretary and ordered filed. In explaining the changes in the timetable, the Deputy Director Frank Gray advised the Commissioners it would be necessary to make a decision now whether or not they wished to have the Redevelopment Plan ready in time for the tax increment deadline. Chairman Putnam asked whether the proposed timetable would meet the schedule to file for the tax increment. The Director, Robert Meyer., asked Ms. Warman, Project Manager, to explain the revisions in the timetable, and Ms. Warman reviewed the actions which would be necessary and the scheduling the Commission would have to make in order to complete all the phases. She explained the final plans could be drawn up within the next month, and suggested a joint meeting be held with the Petaluma Community Development Commission and the Project Area Committee. The Executive Director suggested it would be very difficult for the Commission to make a decision at the next regular meeting April 5th, and suggested a special meeting be held either on March 22nd or March 29th. Ms. Warman advised the Commission the Project Area Committee had a regular meeting scheduled for the 22nd. It was then determined that a Special Joint Meeting would be held March 29th, at 7:30 p.m., in order to review -the plan in its entirety. The Deputy Director Mr. Gray advised the work involved is rather intensive, and there would be three or four processes going on concurrently. The plans would be drawn up; the report prepared; and, the E.I.R. completed for the entire Project Area. Mr. Gray further indicated he felt it was imperative to make a decision to meet this year's tax increment deadline because of pending legislation which may either delete or reduce the funds. Comm. Brunner wondered if such legislation was pending, would it change the whole program. Mr. Gray stated the tax increment financing would still be possible, but would be more complex. He further in- dicated the City was not involved in a complete redevelopment project; the area under consideration is very small and he felt ,it would be given favorable atten- tion if this year's deadline was met. At the conclusion of the discussion, a motion was made by Comm. Mattei, seconded by Comm. Hilligoss, to hold a special meeting with. the Project Area Committee, March 29, 1976, at 7:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. March 1, 1976 EIR FOR PROJECT AREA Deputy Director Frank Gray reported the Legal Counsel for the Petaluma Community Development Commission has advised that a separate E.I.R. for the project area be prepared. It would be necessary to abide by the State guidelines. Mr. Gray further stated there is a possibility of proceeding with the E.I.R. by having it accomplished by the staff. The Environmental Impact Report would be very beneficial to the pro- ject area, and the State Redevelopment Law would permit one Environmental Impact Report for the area. He further advised there is a section in the Environmental Quality Guidelines which would permit the use, by reference, of other E.I.R.'s which have been prepared for the Project Area, and he specifically referred to the one done for the 7 -Eleven Store. Mr. Gray stated he had discussed the possibility of the staff personnel hired by the City of preparing such a report and what the cost might be. They have given him a tentative quotation of $2,500.00 to prepare the report. Some of the infor- mation previously gathered by the City could be included in the report and he referred to updating the 1968 Faustman Traffic and Parking Reports, and relating them to the Redevelopment Plan. He also stated the Economic Report now being prepared is expected to be presented to the Council in the very near future. By combining all of these reports, they could.be included in the Environmental Impact Report. Mr. Larry Kennings, the Planner for the project, stated there is a lot of work and research which has to be done in order to accomplish the E.I.R. All factors have to be considered, and even though a plan is not yet available and the economic analysis has not been furnished to the Commission, they could be starting on the needed research studies to keep the schedule going on the suggested timetable. At the conclusion of the discussion, it was decided to defer the matter until the meeting called for March 29th. Mr. Gray did remind the Commission, however, matters would have to proceed on schedule to meet the timelines and the plan and the report must be finished by August 20th. Mr. Kennings further stated it would be necessary for the Commission to have several special meetings as the consul- tants would need time to'make any additions or adjustments, and have the report retyped and reprinted. PROJECT AREA Mr. Fred Schram, Chairman of the Project Area Committee, COMMITTEE REPORT addressed the Commissioners and stated the timetable is an PCDC RES X68 additional burden, not only on the Petaluma Community Development Commission, but on the Project Area Committee as well. Mr. Schram stated the Committee is meeting every week, not only in discussion sessions, but they are also walking the Project Area on alternate weeks. He stated the previous week they had established their goals and had planned an extra session for Tuesday, March 2nd. Mr. Schram also stated he hoped the Project Area Committee would receive sufficient input from the various people in the community in order to cover all bases. Up until the last meeting, they have had excellent attendance records and believe by April 19th they would have the plan formulated. PROCEDURES FOR Deputy Director Frank Gray stated the Commission needs to PREPARING E.I.R.'S-- establish their own procedures for the preparation of REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Environmental Impact Reports to comply with the State guidelines. Director Robert Meyer stated the Commission must adopt their own procedures as the lead agency. PCDC Resolution #8 adopting procedures for preparation, processing, and review of Environmental Impact Reports was then introduced by Comm. Hilligoss, seconded by Comm. Mattei, and approved by 5 affirmative and 2 absentee votes. STAFF REPORTS Ms. Warman reported 25 people in the downtown area, in- cluding merchants and property owners, had been interviewed, -2- March 1, 1976 STAFF REPORTS and a matrix has been set up. She further stated the (Continued) Project Area has established six goals and objectives. Ms. Warman advised the Commission the Project Area Com- mittee has met in four sessions and another one would be held at 8:00 a.m. on March 2, 1976, when the film on the Sonoma County General Plan would be shown. Ms. Warman further stated progress is being made on working paper No. 1 and the first workbook. She invited the Commissioners to attend the March 2nd meeting. Ms. Warman stated the staff, two Commissioners and four Project Area Committee representatives had attended the seminar entitled "California Style Redevelopment". Comm. Hilligoss attended and stated some of the speakers took a very negative attitude toward redevelopment; however, she felt the attitude was toward large redevelopment projects. Comm. Cavanagh also stated the same four people who gave presentations at the Costa Mesa Seminar a year ago were present at the one on February 27th. The feeling on redevelopment was that everything should be torn down, and Comm. Cavanagh cited the fact the Pamona and Fresno Malls have not proven to be successful. Mr. Fred Schram also spoke about the seminar stating he felt the main theme was that redevelopment, in most cases, is considered on a larger scale, and felt Petaluma was probably taking the proper approach by renewal and rehabilitation, rather than complete urban redevelopment. He further pointed out one of the things mentioned at the conference was to have back-to-back escrows and not have a lot of vacant land in urban redevelopment areas. Comm. Hilligoss further pointed out they suggested it was wiser to utilize the land, even if it had to be sold at a lower price. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Com- mission, the meeting was adjourned at 4:40 p.m. to March 29, 1976, at 7:30 p.m. Attest: Sec tary -3- Chairman