Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPCDC Minutes 11/03/1975-1 ?81975 PETALUMA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Minutes of Regular Meeting November 3,1975 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Helen Putnam at the hour of 4:05 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Cavanagh, ''*Harberson, Hilligoss, ''Perry, and Chairman Putnam. APPROVAL OF MINUTES PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR PROJECT AREA' RES #8 Absent: Commissioners Brunner and Mattei. *Commissioner Harberson arrived at 4:15 p.m. The minutes of September 2, 1975, were approved as recorded. Redevelopment Agency Deputy Director Frank Gray reviewed the preliminary development plan for the designated rede- velopment survey area submitted by the Planning Commission. He explained the State requirements and procedures necessary to implement a redevelopment project. Compliance of these requirements are outlined in a report submitted by Planning Director Dennis Boehlje, dated September 30, 1975, and filed with the Agency's secretary. In answer to various questions, Mr. Gray referred to a color -coded wall map which illustrated existing property uses in the designated project area, population densities, etc., and pointed out boundaries of the project area. After a brief discussion, General Counsel Hudson reviewed legislation prepared for the Commission's consideration; whereupon, Redevelopment Agency Resolution #8 accepting preliminary plan for project area from the Planning Commission, directing preparation of a redevelopment plan for said project area, and directing compliance with Section 33327 of the California Health and Safety Code, was introduced by Commissioner Hilligoss, seconded by Commissioner Perry, and adopted by 5 affirmative votes, 2 absentees. DOWNTOWN IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE A letter dated September 30, 1975, from Jim Williams, Chairman, Downtown Improvement Committee, and Art Agnew, Jr., First Vice -President of the Chamber of Commerce, submitted and filed. Mr. Jim Williams addressed the Commission relating the Downtown Improvement Committee's enthusiasm regarding the redevelopment of the downtown area; however, he also related the Committee's concern about the future implementation of redevelopment plans. He explained many of the merchants, occupants, and property owners, are in a state of limbo --there are no timetables set for redevelopment and many transactions are being held in abeyance. Max Mickelsen, President of the Chamber of Commerce, also addressed the Commission supporting Mr. Williams' concerns, particularly requesting specific timetables. Mr. Williams informed the Commission that the term of the Downtown Improvement Cewdinator, Mr. Larry Martin, had expired October 31, 1975, but Mr. Martin is here today to follow-up and report on a downtown revitalization questionnaire. Mr. Larry Martin reviewed the downtown revitalization questionnaire distributed to property owners about six weeks ago. He explained approximately 25% of the question- naires had been returned and proceeded to report current results. The results PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR PROJECT AREA RES X68 (Continued) revitalization. It was also be included in polls because decisions. are from about 30 property owners out of 120 owners, and, they are signed adding credance to the questionnaires that have been returned. Tax increments for revitaliza- tion and property owners support for development of more parking area relevant to Items 5 and 6 of the question- naire were.discussed.;:however, the discussion was con- cluded with the hope that more questionnaires would be returned for a better understanding of the downtown suggested by Mr. Williams that occupants of the area occupants are ultimately affected by property owners PROJECT OFFICER Agency Director Robert Meyer suggested the next step AND BUDGET for implementation of a redevelopment plan is to appoint a project officer. He referred to a six month budget submitted by Deputy Director Frank Gray for support of a project officer and staff. (Proposed budget filed with Agency Secretary.) Mr. Meyer proposed a list of eligible project officers be submitted to the Commission at their December lst meeting for their review and selection of an appointee. Also brought up at this time was the appointment of a project area committee. A list of suggested candidates for such a committee was submitted by Deputy Director Frank Gray, dated November 3, 1975, and filed with the Agency Secretary. Mr. Gray further advised the Commission time is of the essence in the implementation of an area plan in order to establish a tax increment area. He explained State legislation is pending that would reconstruct the tax increment requirements, and, therefore, urged the Commission's consideration of the proposed budget and the appointment of a project officer. PROJECT AREA Redevelopment Agency General Counsel Matthew Hudson COMMITTEE cited Section 33385 of the California Health and RES X69 Safety Code to advise the Commission in the matter of forming a project area committee. He explained the law specifically states the residents and existing community organizations are responsible for the develop- ment of a project area committee. Initially the committee must be formed by residents in the project area, but the Commission may form a special committee at a later date. Further clarification was requested by Mr. Larry Martin regarding the formation of a project area committee. It was reiterated the responsibility of forming a project area committee was delegated to the residents of the designated project area; however, once the Committee is formed, it should come before the Commission for recognition. Comments were made by Mr. Williams, Mr. Martin, -and Mr. Mickelsen requesting clarification -of the Health and Safety Code section, the definition of existing community organizations and residents, and the need for staff direction. Mr. Harold Mahoney expressed satisfaction with the progress made today, and suggested that appropriate publicity be given that a project area committee is going to be developed and that the Downtown Improvement Committee and the Chamber of Commerce be notified. After a brief discussion, Redevelopment Agency Resolution #9 calling upon residents and community organizations to form a project area was introduced by Commissioner Perry, seconded by Commissioner Harberson, and adopted by 5 affirmative votes, 2 absentees. IWA SPECIAL COUNSEL General Counsel Matthew Hudson recommended the Commission RES #10 consider a special counsel for redevelopment legal advice. `The Commission briefly reviewed a resume' submitted by Joseph E. Coombs, Jr., citing his past participation in the redevelopment projects of various cities and his present position as Executive Vice -President of the California Information Center for Community Development. Mr. Hudson added that other members of Mr. Coombs' firm, McDonough, Holland, Schwartz, and Allen, also have experience in redevelopment and, therefore, would be a good source of information if necessary. Agency Director Robert Meyer supported Mr. Hudson's recommendation; whereupon, Redevelopment Agency Resolution #10 approving association of Special Counsel for the Petaluma Redevelopment Agency was introduced by Commissioner Harberson, seconded by Commissioner Hilligoss, and adopted by 5 affirmative votes, 2 absentees. HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT MEETING REPRESENTATIVE ADJOURNMENT Attest ting Secretary Redevelopment Agency Director Robert Meyer informed the Commission a meeting will be held November 5th from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon regarding Housing and Community Development Act, Section 8 funds. He requested a representative from the Redevelopment Agency attend the meeting along with a staff member. Commissioner Hilligoss agreed to represent the Commission. There being no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting was adjourned at 5:40 p.m. -3- Chairman