Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 5.A 04/17/2006CITY OF PETALUNIA, CALIFORNIA 5.A AGENDA BILL April 17, 2006 Agenda Title: Meeting Date: Introduction of Proposed Merger of the Petaluma Community April 17, 2006 Development and Central Business District Redevelopment Projects Meeting Time: ®3:00 PM ❑ 7:00 PM Category (check one): ❑ Consent Calendar ❑ Public Hearing ® New Business ❑ Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation Department: Director: Contact Person: Phone Number: Redevelopment I Michael Bierman Michael Bierman 778-4345 Cost of Proposal: Account Number: N/A N/A Amount Budgeted: Name of Fund: Attachments to Agenda Packet Item: 1. Preliminary Report — Petaluma Plan Amendments 2. Draft Redevelopment Plan Amendments 3. City Resolution finding that Project Area Committee is not required to be formed in connection with merger 4. Resolution of PCDC approving the Preliminary Report on Proposed Redevelopment Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Summary Statement: Staff and consultants have prepared a Preliminary Report and proposed redevelopment plan amendments for the City's two redevelopment projects: Central Business District (CBD) and Petaluma Community Development (PCD). If the proposed amendments are adopted, each of the project areas will continue to be governed by its own redevelopment plan, but the fiscal merger will allow PCDC to combine financial resources to eliminate adverse conditions in both project areas. If adopted, the plan amendments would accomplish the following: • Fiscally merge the CBD Redevelopment Project and the PCD Project. • Create a combined limit on outstanding bonded indebtedness in the two Project Areas and increase this limit to $250 million. • Repeal the time limits for incurring debt in the CBD Original Project Area and the PCD Project Area. • Extend by two years the time limits for plan activities and receipt of tax increment in the CBD Original Project Area. Recommended Citv Council Action/Suggested Motion: Staff recommends that the Petaluma Community Development Commission ("PCDC") adopt the attached resolution (i) approving the Preliminary Report on the Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, (ii) approving the draft Redevelopment Plan Amendments, (iii) authorizing transmittal of the Report and the draft Redevelopment Plan Amendments to each affected taxing entity, the Planning Commission and interested parties, (iv) finding that formation of a Project Area Committee is not required in connection with the proposed fiscal merger and plan amendments, (v) finding that the proposed fiscal merger and plan amendments are exempt from CEQA, (vi) recommending that the City Council consider adoption of an ordinance that would amend the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Community Development Project Area (the "PCD Plan") and the Redevelopment Plan for the Central Business District (the "CBD Plan") to eliminate the time limit for establishing debt for the PCD Project Area and the CBD Original Project Area, and (vii) recommending that the City Council consider adoption of an ordinance that would extend by two years the time limits for plan effectiveness and receipt of tax increment for the CBD Original Project Area pursuant to SB 1096. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution (i) finding that formation of a Project Area Committee is not required in connection with the proposed fiscal merger and plan amendments, and (ii) finding that the proposed fiscal merger and plan amendments are exempt from CEQA. Reviewed b} Admin. Svcs. Dir: e L�� 111 (111 Todav's Date: Reviewed by City Attornev: 0 Date: Revision # and Date Revised: Auproybd by City Manager: Date: File Code: CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA APRIL 17, 2006 AGENDA REPORT FOR MERGER OF PETALUMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff is proposing the Central Business District and Petaluma Community Development Redevelopment Projects merge to create a financially merged Agency. This will provide greater financial capability so it can meet the needs of both project areas. No new land is being added to the project area. 2. BACKGROUND: Staff and consultants have prepared a Preliminary Report and proposed redevelopment plan amendments for the City's two redevelopment projects: Central Business District (CBD) and Petaluma Community Development (PCD). If the proposed amendments are adopted, each of the project areas will continue to be governed by its own redevelopment plan, but the fiscal merger will allow PCDC to combine financial resources to eliminate adverse conditions in both project areas. If adopted, the plan amendments would accomplish the following: • Fiscally merge the CBD Redevelopment Project and the PCD Project. • Create a combined limit on outstanding bonded indebtedness in the two Project Areas and increase this limit to $250 million. • Repeal the time limits for incurring debt in the CBD Original Project Area and the PCD Project Area. • Extend by two years the time limits for plan activities and receipt of tax increment in the CBD Original Project Area. Preliminary Resort to Taxine Entities The process for amending the redevelopment plans to fiscally merge the projects is quite complex. The first step in the process is approval by PCDC of the Preliminary Report, which is attached to this staff report. The Preliminary Report was prepared as an informational document in order for the taxing entities to be aware of the reasons for the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. Once the Preliminary Report is approved for transmittal by PCDC, it will be forwarded to all taxing entities as background information prior to informal consultations between PCDC and the taxing entities. The Preliminary Report is organized as follows: 1. Chapter I presents a general overview and background for the Plan Amendments, summarizes the reasons for amending and merging the Redevelopment Plans, describes the goals of the Amendments, outlines the legal requirements and presents the process for amending and fiscally merging the Redevelopment Plans. 2. Chapter II describes the existing conditions in the Project Areas, focusing on the remaining adverse conditions that the PCDC continues to work to alleviate, and summarizes redevelopment efforts to date. 3. Chapter III describes the PCDC Redevelopment Program for both project areas, including the projects, activities and expenditures to implement the Redevelopment Program under the Fiscal Merger. While the Redevelopment Program for each individual Redevelopment Project will not be modified as a result of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, the chapter synthesizes the Redevelopment Program into one merged Redevelopment Program for ease of administration and to facilitate implementation. The chapter describes how the merged Redevelopment Program will alleviate the remaining adverse conditions described in Chapter II and summarizes the anticipated cost for the merged Redevelopment Program. 4. Chapter IV analyzes the financial feasibility of the proposed Plan Amendments, details the alternative funding resources available to PCDC to accomplish the Redevelopment Program, shows why the Plan Amendments are necessary to eliminate blighting conditions in the Project Areas, describes tax increment financing, and presents projections of the amount of tax increment revenue that would be generated with the proposed Plan Amendments. 5. The appendices include supporting documentation and background information, including photographic documentation of the remaining adverse conditions in both project areas. Staff recommends that PCDC approve the Preliminary Report and authorize transmittal of the Preliminary Report to affected taxing entities, the Planning Commission and interested parties. The Preliminary Report is a preliminary informational document designed to inform the affected taxing entities and the community regarding the proposed redevelopment plan amendments and merger. Pr000sed Plan Amendments The proposed amendments to the PCD Plan and the CBD Plan that would effectuate the proposed fiscal merger are attached to this staff report. The amendments would fiscally merge the two project areas and would combine and increase the limit on outstanding indebtedness. Staff recommends that PCDC approve the proposed plan amendments and authorize their transmittal to affected taxing entities, the Planning Commission and interested parties. It is anticipated that the City Council and PCDC will consider adoption of the proposed plan amendments and fiscal merger at a joint public hearing in mid-July. Proiect Area Committee Community Redevelopment Law ("CRL") requires the formation of a Project Area Committee (PAC) in connection with the adoption of a new redevelopment plan (or a plan amendment) that (i) authorizes the use of eminent domain for residential property in a project area with a substantial number of low and moderate -income residents, or (ii) includes one or more public projects that will displace a substantial number of low income persons or moderate -income persons or both. The proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger have no effect upon the PCDC's or the City's authority to use eminent domain pursuant to the Redevelopment Plans, nor do they provide for development of public projects that will result in substantial displacement. Therefore, formation of a PAC is not required. However, the CRL requires PCDC to consult with community residents and organizations in connection with the plan amendment process. To that end, PCDC staff have scheduled consultations with community representatives and will hold at least one community meeting during the month of June. In addition, as required by the CRL, notice of the proposed plan amendment and fiscal merger will be mailed to all property owners, residents and businesses in the redevelopment project areas prior to the hearing at which adoption of the plan amendments will be considered. Staff recommends that PCDC and the City Council each adopt a finding that it is not necessary to establish a Project Area Committee in connection with the proposed plan amendments and fiscal merger. Environmental Review PCDC and City Planning staff have determined that adequate environmental review has been completed for the proposed plan amendments and fiscal merger because (i) the fiscal merger is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), (ii) the potential environmental effects of the redevelopment plans were analyzed in previously certified environmental impact reports, including the Petaluma General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the program level EIR for the Central Petaluma Specific Plan, the PCD Project EIR and the CBD Plan Amendment EIR, and (iii) the proposed plan amendments do not propose new projects, will not alter the implementation of the Redevelopment Plans, do not propose any land use changes to those already analyzed in the current General Plan, and do not modify the existing Redevelopment Programs. Specific projects proposed to be developed pursuant to the redevelopment plans will require compliance with CEQA at the time such projects are proposed. Staff recommends that PCDC and the City Council each adopt a finding determining that the proposed plan amendments and fiscal merger are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b)(3) and that further environmental review is not required in connection with the proposed plan amendments and fiscal merger at this time. Extension of Plan Effectiveness and Tax Increment Collection Time Limits Recently enacted legislation (SB 1096) permits redevelopment plans to be amended to extend the time limits for project activities and tax increment collection when the redevelopment agency is required to contribute to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) during FY 2004/05 and FY 2005/06 and the plan effectiveness time limit is less than twenty years from the agency's SB 1096 contribution to ERAF. For plans that have a time limit for project activities that expires more than ten but less than twenty years from the date of the agency's SB 1096 contribution to ERAF, in order to adopt the time extensions permitted by SB 1096, the legislative body must determine that the following requirements have been met: (i) the redevelopment agency must be in compliance with CRL requirements relating to the deposit of tax increment funds into a low- and moderate -income housing set-aside fund and the use of such set-aside funds, (ii) the agency must have adopted an implementation plan in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33490, (iii) the agency must be in compliance with the requirements set forth in Health and Safety Code Section 33413 relating to inclusionary and replacement housing production; (iv) the agency must not be subject to sanctions for failure to expend, encumber or disburse an excess low- and moderate -income housing fund surplus; and (v) the legislative body must determine that the funds that would be used to make the SB 1096 ERAF payments would otherwise have been used to pay the cost of projects and activities necessary to carry out the redevelopment plan. The CBD Original Project Area time limit for project activities is September 27, 2017, and it is the only the project area eligible for extension. The City Council cannot extend time limits in the PCD Project Area or in the CBD Added Area because their time limits for plan effectiveness exceed the SB 1096 eligibility period. Because the City Council has not yet extended the CBD Original Project Area time limits pursuant to SB 1096, the City Council can extend the time limits for two years upon adoption of the required findings and adoption of an ordinance at a public hearing following publication of notice and transmittal of notice to the affected taxing entities at least 30 days prior to the hearing. Staff recommends that the City Council consider adoption of the required findings and adoption of an ordinance extending the plan effectiveness and tax increment collection time limits pursuant to SB 1096 concurrently with the Council's consideration of the plan amendments and fiscal merger in mid-July. Elimination of Debt Incurrence Time Limit Pursuant to CRL Section 33333.6(e)(2)(B), redevelopment plans adopted prior to 1994 can be amended to repeal the time limit for establishing debt by the adoption of an ordinance. This time limit cannot be eliminated for the CBD Added Area because that portion of the project area was established in 2001. However, the time limit for establishment of debt may be eliminated for both the CBD Original Project Area and for the PCD Project Area. The tax increment projections contained in the Preliminary Report reflect the assumption that the time limits for incurring debt in the PCD and the CBD Original Project Area will be repealed. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt ordinances to repeal such time limits concurrently with the Council's consideration of the plan amendments and fiscal merger in mid-July. 3. ALTERNATIVES: Do not merge the project areas. 4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS: N/A 5. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Petaluma Community Development Commission ("PCDC") adopt the attached resolution (i) approving the Preliminary Report on the Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, (ii) approving the draft Redevelopment Plan Amendments, (iii) authorizing transmittal of the Report and the draft Redevelopment Plan Amendments to each affected taxing entity, the Planning Commission and interested parties, (iv) finding that formation of a Project Area Committee is not required in connection with the proposed fiscal merger and plan amendments, (v) finding that the proposed fiscal merger and plan amendments are exempt from CEQA, (vi) recommending that the City Council consider adoption of an ordinance that would amend the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Community Development Project Area (the "PCD Plan") and the Redevelopment Plan for the Central Business District (the "CBD Plan") to eliminate the time limit for establishing debt for the PCD Project Area and the CBD Original Project Area, and (vii) recommending that the City Council consider adoption of an ordinance that would extend by two years the time limits for plan effectiveness and receipt of tax increment for the CBD Original Project Area pursuant to SB 1096. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution (i) finding that formation of a Project Area Committee is not required in connection with the proposed fiscal merger and plan amendments, and (ii) finding that the proposed fiscal merger and plan amendments are exempt from CEQA. Future Actions Following transmittal of the Preliminary Report and proposed plan amendments to affected taxing entities, staff and consultants will consult with the taxing entities and with community representatives, and the consultants will complete the Final Report to Council. It is anticipated that the Final Report to Council will be considered at a PCDC/City Council meeting in mid-June, and that in mid-July, PCDC and City Council will hold a joint public hearing to consider adoption of ordinances that would (i) adopt the plan amendments and fiscal merger, (ii) eliminate the time limit for establishment of debt for the PCD Project Area and the CBD Original Project Area, and (iii) extend by two years the time limits for plan effectiveness and receipt of tax increment in the CBD Original Project Area. g1farms/2005 agenda bill Preliminary Report Attachment 1 Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Prepared by Petaluma Community Development Commission 11 English Street Petaluma, CA 94952-2610 Seifel GONSOWNG IHC. 221 6!ain Street Suite 4?0 San Francisco CA 94105 415.518.0700 lax 415.618.0707 www.seilel.com I. A. B. C. D. E. F. G. Table of Contents Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger Introduction.............................................................................................I-1 ReportOrganization............................................................................................................................................I4 Description of the Redevelopment Plan Amendments...................................................................................... 1-4 Reasons for Amending the Redevelopment Plans..............................................................................................I-7 Redevelopment Plan Goals and Objectives.................................................... .................................................... 1-8 Conformity with the General Plan and Central Petaluma Specific Plan.........................................................1-11 Preliminary Report Requirements..................................................................................................................... I-13 Overview of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment Process........................................................................... I-15 II. Existing Conditions................................................................................ II -1 A. Introduction......................................................................................................................................................... 11-1 B. Blighting Factors Affecting the Project Areas..................................................................................................11-8 C. Central Business District Project Area (Original and Added Areas)............................................................I1-18 D. Petaluma Community Development Project Area..........................................................................................II-42 E. Overall Conclusions for Blighting Conditions................................................................................................1I-60 Petaluma Community Development Commission i Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table of Contents Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger (cont.) III. Redevelopment Program Description ..................................................III -1 A. Introduction .............................. ..................................................................................... ..................................... III -1 B. Redevelopment Plan Goals and Objectives ............................. ......................................................................... III -2 C. Relationship Between the Redevelopment Program and Alleviation of Blighting Conditions ......................11I-2 D. Description of PCDC's Non -Housing Redevelopment Program.....................................................................III-5 E. Description of PCDC's Affordable Housing Redevelopment Program .................................................... ...... III -9 IV. Proposed Methods of Financing and Feasibility ..................................IV -1 A. Introduction....................................................................................................................................................... N-1 B. Stimulation of Private Investment....................................................................................................................IV-2 C. Estimated Funding Requirements ......................... ...................................................................................... .. ... IV -3 D. Potential Sources Other than -Tax Increment Financing.................................................................................. IVA E. Tax Increment Financing as the Primary Source of Funding.........................................................................IV-9 F. Assumptions Used in Tax Increment Projections.........................................................................................IV-14 G. Tax Increment Projections..............................................................................................................................IV-19 H. Financial Feasibility of the Redevelopment Program ............ ........................................ ............................... IV -22 I. Necessity of Tax Increment Financing and Fiscal Merger ........... ..................... .................... ....................... IV -23 Petaluma Community Development Commission ii Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table of Contents Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger (cont.) Lists of Tables, Figures and Graphs Tables Table I-1 Summary of Existing Time and Fiscal Limits...................................................................................................I-5 I-2 Table 1-2 Summary of Proposed Time and Fiscal Limits................................................................................................. I-7 Table 11-1 Completed and Ongoing Redevelopment Projects and Activities in the CBD_ ........................ ................ 11-20 Table 11-2 LUFT Sites within the CBD and Citywide ................. ................. .................. ............ .......... ............ ............. 1I-26 Table II -3 Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFTs) in the CBD ................ .............................. ....... ......................... II -27 Table 114 Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanups (SLIC) Sites in the CBD .......................................................... 11-28 Table II -5 Prototypical Purchase & Rehabilitation Project, Retail and Office Use......................................................11-35 II -I 1 Table II -6 Completed and Ongoing Redevelopment Projects and Activities in the PCD............................................I1-44 Table 11-7 Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanups (SLIC) Sites in the PCD..........................................................11-48 Table 11-8 Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFTs) in the PCD..............................................................................II-49 Table III -1 How the Redevelopment Program Will Alleviate Blighting Conditions ....................................................III -4 Table III -2 Redevelopment Program Non -Housing and Housing Projects and Activities ....................... ..................... III -6 Table 111-3 Estimated Net Cost to Agency of Redevelopment Program..................................................................... I11-10 Table IV -1 Estimated Net Cost to PCDC of Redevelopment Program......................................................................... IV -3 Table IV -2 Base Year Assessed Value and Time Limits Under Plan Amendments and Merger .............................. IV -11 Table IV -3 Pass Through Payment Obligations Under the Plan Amendments And Fiscal Merger .......................... IV -17 Table IV4 Summary of Projected Tax Increments .................. ...................... ......... ........... .......... ......... ............ .......IV -20 Table IV -5 Comparison of Estimated Tax Increment Revenues and Agency Funding Requirements ...................... IV -23 Figures Figure1-1 CBD Boundaries............................................................................................................................................... I-2 FigureI-2 PCD Boundaries................................................................................................................................................1-3 Figure I-3 Central Petaluma Specific Plan Boundaries...................................................................................................I-12 Figure II -1 CBD Photograph Location Map.....................................................................................................................11-6 Figure II -2 PCD Photograph Location Map.....................................................................................................................11-7 Figure II -3 Earthquake Faults and Probabilities, San Francisco Bay Region.................................................................11-9 Figure II -4 Earthquake Shaking Scenario: Rodgers Creek Fault, Magnitude 7.0 ......................................................... II -I 1 Figure II -5 Liquefaction Susceptibility ...........................................................................................................................11-12 Figure II -6 Unreinforced Masonry Buildings.................................................................................................................11-14 Figure 1I-7 100 -Year Floodplain Boundary ....................................................................................................................1I-16 Figure II -8 Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks and Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanups Sites in the CBD .....II -29 Figure II -9 Substandard Lots and Incompatible Use in the CBD_ ................................................................................ 11-32 Figure 11-10 Vacant and Undemtilized Parcels in the CBD... ................................. .................................... ..... ... ...... 11-37 Figure II -11 Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks and Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanups Sites in the PCD .... 11-51 Figure 11-12 Substandard Lots and Incompatible Use in the PCD .... ................. ................ ........................ ......... .......... II -54 Figure 11-13 Vacant and Undemtilized Land in the PCD..............................................................................................II-56 Figure IV -1 Distribution of Projected Tax Increment Through Remaining Life of the Redevelopment Plans......... IV -21 Graphs Graph II -1 Age of Building in the CBD.........................................................................................................................11-23 Graph II -2 Age of Building in the PCD..........................................................................................................................I1-47 Petaluma Community Development Commission iii Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table of Contents Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger (cont.) Anaendices Appendix A: Sources Appendix B: Photographic Documentation of Existing Conditions Appendix C: Potential Funding Sources Appendix D: Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Community Development Commission iv Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 I. Introduction The City of Petaluma (City) and the Petaluma Community Development Commission (PCDC) are considering amendments to the existing two Redevelopment Plans (Plan Amendments). The proposed Plan Amendments will fiscally merge the Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area (CBD) and the Petaluma Community Development Project Arca (PCD). The Amendments will also combine and increase the current individual outstanding indebtedness limits of the existing two Project Areas but will not alter existing limits on total tax increment revenues to the Agency. The Plan Amendments will also repeal the time limit for debt incurrence in the PCD and CBD (1976 Original Area).' As described in Sections 33485 through 33489 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (CRL), a part of the California Health and Safety Code, a fiscal merger enables an agency to pool the tax increment revenue of separate project areas in order to focus on the needs of a particular project area. An agency can adjust that focus over time so that a community's overall redevelopment needs can be addressed in a more efficient and effective manner. The Fiscal Merger will allow the PCDC to combine financial resources and facilitate its efforts to better implement its Redevelopment Program, which will eliminate blighting conditions in the two Project Areas. After the Fiscal Merger, each Project Area will continue to be governed by its own Redevelopment Plan with its respective set of redevelopment goals and time limits. The Redevelopment Program for each existing Project Area will not be modified.' - The PCDC is preparing the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger for consideration by the City Council. This document serves as the Preliminary Report for the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, as required by Section 33344.5 of the CRL. The Preliminary Report is the first major background document in the process leading to consideration of the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. The report is a public document designed to provide background information to the PCDC and taxing entities affected by the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. If adopted by the City Council, the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger will accomplish the following: 1. Fiscally merge the Central Business District Redevelopment Project and the Petaluma Community Development Project. 2. Create a combined limit on outstanding bonded indebtedness in the two Project Areas and increase this limit to $250 million. 3. Repeal the time limits for incurring debt in the CBD (1976 Original Area) and PCD .3 Figure I-1 shows the boundaries of the CBD, and Figure I-2 shows the boundaries of the PCD. I SB 211 authorizes the removal of the debt incurrence deadlines in redevelopment project areas adopted prior to 1994, through adoption of an ordinance. The City proposes to remove this deadline by adopting an "SB 211" ordinance concurrent with the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. For ease of administration and to facilitate implementation, the projects and activities for the individual Project Areas have been synthesized into one Redevelopment Program. 3 As further discussed in this chapter, the CBD Redevelopment Plan was adopted in 1976, and the Original Project Area is referred to as the 1976 Original Area. Territory was added to CBD in 2001 through a Plan Amendment Process, and this area is referred to as the 2001 Added Area. Petaluma Community Development Commission I-1 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 I Zl ___. - - CJS• _ �-_ �� ' /." V _ N _ - ate` . ❑ - E U®coo 75 O U A. Report Organization This Preliminary Report describes the reasons for fiscally merging and amending the Redevelopment Plans, documents the existing physical and economic blighting conditions in the Project Areas, and describes the proposed programs and activities of the Redevelopment Program. The Preliminary Report also provides a preliminary assessment of financing methods and economic feasibility of the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. Chapter I presents a general overview and background for the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, summarizes the reasons for amending the Redevelopment Plans to fiscally merge the Project Areas, outlines the CRL requirements, describes the goals of the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, and describes the amendment process. Chapter Ii summarizes the existing conditions in the Project Areas. This Chapter describes the remaining blighting factors affecting the Project Areas, and summarizes redevelopment efforts to date. Chapter III presents the Redevelopment Program for the two Project Areas, describes how the Program will alleviate the identified remaining blighting conditions, and summarizes the anticipated cost for the Redevelopment Program. The Redevelopment Program projects and activities for each individual Redevelopment Project will not be modified as a result of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. Chapter III synthesizes the Redevelopment Program projects and activities planned for the individual Project Areas into one Redevelopment Program for ease of administration and to facilitate implementation. Chapter N analyzes the financial feasibility of the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. It details the alternative funding resources available to the Agency to accomplish the Redevelopment Program and shows why the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger are necessary to accomplish the Redevelopment Program. It describes tax increment financing and presents projections of how much tax increment revenue will be generated over the remaining life of the redevelopment plans for the two Project Areas. The appendices include supporting documentation and background information. Appendix A provides a list of source documents used to prepare the Preliminary Report. Appendix B contains photographic documentation of the remaining physical and economic blighting conditions in the two Project Areas. Appendix C includes a matrix of potential funding sources for the Redevelopment Program, and Appendix D presents supporting tables for the tax increment revenue projections. This Report has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.). All Code Section references used in the Preliminary Report refer to the Health & Safety Code unless otherwise specified. B. Description of the Redevelopment Plan Amendments The proposed Plan Amendments described in this Preliminary Report will result in the Fiscal Merger of the CBD and the PCD Redevelopment Project Areas. They will also repeal the time limit for debt incurrence in the CBD (1976 Original Area) and PCD, and combine and increase the limits on outstanding bonded indebtedness for the two Redevelopment Projects. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-4 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Under the Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments, each of the two existing Project Areas will continue to be governed by its own Redevelopment Plan with associated goals and time limits. However, the CBD and the PCD will have a single combined dollar limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness, and the Fiscal Merger will enable the use of increment from one Project Area to benefit the other Project Area, as necessary, to accomplish the goals of the Redevelopment Program. Because redevelopment agencies were required to make payments to the Education Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) to help balance the state budget, Senate Bill 1045 (Chapter 260, Statutes of 2003) authorized cities and counties to adopt ordinances that would extend certain time limits in their redevelopment plans by one year. At its meeting held on June 7, 2004, the City Council extended the time limits by one year for the effectiveness of each of the Project Area plans and the use of tax increment to repay indebtedness by adopting Ordinances No. 2183 N.C.S. and No. 2184 N.C.S. under SB 1045. 1. Existing Time and Fiscal Limits The existing time and fiscal limits for the CBD (1976 Original Area and 2001 Added Area) and the PCD are shown in Table I-1. These limits reflect the adoption of Ordinances No. 2183 N.C.S. and No. 2184 N.C.S. under SB 1045. Table I-1 Summary of Existing Time and Fiscal Limits Item Acres I Date Adopted IPlan Effectiveness Date I Base Year Base Year Assessed Value Time Limits Incurring Debt Eminent Domain Proiect Activities' Tax Increment Receipt' I Fiscal Limits PCD CBD Original Area Added Area 2,740 98 127 July 18, 1988 September 27, 1976 June 18, 2001 August 17, 1988 October 27, 1976 July 18, 2001 FY 1987/88 FY 1976/77 FY 2000/01 $331,539,332 $18,832,170 $48,701,865 July 18, 2008 September 27, 2011 June 18, 2021 Expired June 18, 2013 June 18, 2013 July 18, 2029 September 27, 2017 June 18, 2032 July 18, 2039 September 27, 2027 June 18, 2047 Tax Increment Cap $800,000,000 $800,000,000 Outstanding Indebtedness Limit 1 $80,000,000 $50,000,000 a. In June of 2004, PCDC adopted plan amendments enabled by SB 1045 to extend the time limits for project activities and tax increment receipt by one year for plans that contributed to ERAF in FY 2003/04. The one year extension applies to both the PCD and CBD (both 1976 Original and 2001 Added Areas). Source: Petaluma Community Development Commission. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-5 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 2. Senate Bill 1096 Amendment Recently enacted legislation contained in SB 1096 provides for the extension of time limits for redevelopment projects that contribute to ERAF during FY 2004/05 and FY 2005/06 and have redevelopment plans with a time limit for plan effectiveness that is less than twenty years from the Agency's contribution to ERAF. The time limit for plan effectiveness is also referred to as the time limit for project activities, as this is the time limit during which the agency can undertake activities in the Redevelopment Project. The maximum time limit for tax increment collection is ten years after the time limit for project activities or redevelopment plan effectiveness. Similar to its predecessor legislation, Senate Bill 1045 (SB 1045), SB 1096 provides a financial offset for redevelopment agencies that are mandated by the state to contribute to ERAF. However, in contrast to SB 1045, SB 1096 does not allow legislative bodies to extend all redevelopment plans, and it requires that the City Council hold a public hearing and make certain findings in order to take advantage of the plan extension. In order to be eligible for the SB 1096 time extension for FY 2004/05, the time limit for project activities must be no later than the end of FY 2024/25 (June 30, 2025). In order to be eligible for the SB 1096 time extension for FY 2005/06, the time limit for project activities must be no later than the end of FY 2025/26 (June 30, 2026). The CBD 1976 Original Area's current time limit for project activities is September 27, 2017 and it is the only the project area eligible for extension. The City Council cannot extend time limits in the other two Project Areas as their current time limits are outside of the SB 1096 eligibility period. Because the City Council has not extended the time limit for project activities and tax increment collection by one year in the CBD 1976 Original Area for FY 2004/05, the City Council will be able to extend the time limits for two years during FY 2005/06.4 3. Proposed Time and Fiscal Limits The proposed limits resulting from the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, shown in Table I-2, include the cumulative effects resulting from the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, along with the City's adoption of the ordinance authorized by Senate Bill 1096, as described in Section B.2. All tax increment revenues projected in this Preliminary Report reflect the cumulative effect of the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger along with the actions enabled by SB 1045 and SB 1096. 4 The City anticipates adopting the ordinance authorized by SB 1096 around the time of adoption of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Mercer. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-6 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table I-2 Summary of Proposed Time and Fiscal Limits with Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Item PCD CBD Repeal Repeal June 18, 2021 Eminent Domain Expired June 18, 2013 June 18, 2013 Original Area Added Area Acres 2,740 98 127 Date Adopted July 18, 1988 September 27, 1976 June 18, 2001 Plan Effectiveness Date August 17, 1988 October 27, 1976 July 18, 2001 Base Year FY 1987/88 FY 1976/77 FY 2000/01 Base Year Assessed Value $331,539,332 $18,832,170 $48,701,865 Time Limits Incurring Debt Repeal Repeal June 18, 2021 Eminent Domain Expired June 18, 2013 June 18, 2013 Project Activities' July 18, 2029 September 27, 2019° June 18, 2032 Tax Increment Receipt° July 18, 2039 September 27, 20296 June 18, 2047 Fiscal Limits Tax Increment Cap $800,000,000 $800,000,000 Outstanding Indebtedness Limit $250,000,000 a. In June of 2004, PCDC adopted plan amendments enabled by SB 1045 to extend the time limits for project activities and tax increment receipt by one year for plans that contributed to ERAF in FY 2003/04. The one year extension applies to both the PCD and CBD (both 1976 Original and 2001 Added Areas). b. This table assumes the PCDC will extend the time limits of project activities and tax increment receipts by two years, authorized by the SB 1096 ordinance. Source: Petaluma Community Development Commission. C. Reasons for Amending the Redevelopment Plans Although significant progress has been made in alleviating blight and revitalizing the CBD and PCD, both Project Areas continue to exhibit blighting conditions that burden the community. The primary reasons for the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger are, to: 1. Achieve the goals of the Redevelopment Plans. 2. Implement the existing Redevelopment Program. 3. Alleviate the physical and economic blighting conditions that continue to exist in the Project Areas. 4. Provide flexibility to combine and focus revenues from different Project Areas on the needs of a particular Project Area. 5. Adjust the focus over time so that the community's overall redevelopment needs can be addressed in a more efficient and effective manner. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-7 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Many of the blighting conditions identified in each of the Redevelopment Project Areas at the time of their adoption persist today. In both Project Areas, these include: • Deficient or deteriorated buildings that are unsafe or unhealthy; • Factors inhibiting proper use of buildings or lots, such as hazardous material contamination; • Incompatible adjacent uses; • Substandard lots in multiple ownership; • Depreciated values and impaired investments; • Economic indicators of distressed property, such as high business vacancies and abnormally low lease rates; and • Deficient public improvements, public facilities and utilities. A Redevelopment Plan Goals and Objectives The Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger will achieve the purposes of the CRL, the City's General Plan and the Central Petaluma Specific Plan. The following goals and objectives, intended to eliminate physical and economic blighting conditions, were established with the adoption and/or amendments of the CBD and PCD Redevelopment Plans, the 2000 City of Petaluma Bicycle Plan and 1996 City of Petaluma River Access and Enhancement Plan. Together with zoning regulations, these objectives will continue to guide the direction of all future development within the Project Areas. Central Business District (CBD) The following major goals and objectives will continue to be pursued by the Agency, as set forth in the 1976 CBD Redevelopment Plan and the 2001 Amended and Restated CBD Redevelopment Plan: • Revitalize the economic and physical condition of Downtown Petaluma while preserving and enhancing the inherent qualities of the community. • Eliminate and prevent the spread of conditions of blight and deterioration in the Project Area by the following: o Develop a marketing strategy with appropriate economic programs whereby Downtown Petaluma is able to capture a greater share of the market for retail sales and services. o Develop a land use pattern that reinforces the viability of Downtown Petaluma. o Develop a circulation pattern that will allow ease of access to, through and around the downtown area. o Develop an adequate system for parking vehicles on and off the circulation routes. o Develop a pleasant pedestrian environment in the downtown area with a wide variety of amenities including urban furniture (benches, bus shelters, lights, etc.) and a comfortable circulation pattern. o Develop architectural and landscape architectural design programs that will enhance the overall character of the downtown area and preserve the historical and unique buildings and structures. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-8 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 • Eliminate adverse physical and economic conditions in the Original and Added Areas. • Provide an environment conducive to social and economic growth. • Implement the Central Petaluma Specific Plan. • Promote economic vitality in Petaluma's Central Business District by attracting new jobs that will employ Petalumans, encouraging new development and mixed uses, and enhancing the downtown. • Encourage development, public access and recreational opportunities along the river, and help to integrate river orientation by rehabilitating older shopping centers. • Provide for a mixture of industrial, office, retail and compatible residential development. • Provide sufficient parking to serve new businesses and residents while supporting the use of alternative modes of transportation. • Construct and repair public infrastructure, including streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters. • Reinforce the role of the Central Business District as a center for transit and non -vehicular modes of travel. • Provide a street system in undeveloped areas that strengthens the existing roadway network, serves new development, and balances the need for through movement with livability and pedestrian/bicycle orientation. • Enhance streetscape improvements, including street trees, landscaping, sidewalks and strengthen linkages to and along the river through a system of urban open spaces. • Ensure a choice of housing types and locations to all persons regardless of income, sex, cultural origin, age, marital status, or physical disabilities. 2. Petaluma Community Development (PCD) The following major goals and objectives will continue to be pursued by the Agency, as set forth in the 1988 PCD Redevelopment Plan and Ordinance No. 1725 N.C.S.: • Eliminate the conditions of blight existing in the Project Area. • Ensure to the greatest possible extent that the causes of blighting conditions in the Project Area will be either eliminated or protected against. • Provide participation opportunities for owners and business tenants in the Project Area subject to the overall redevelopment objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. • Encourage and ensure the redevelopment of the Project Area. • Encourage and foster the economic revitalization of the Project Area. • Finance and construct the public improvements described in Section IV(F)(2) of the 1988 Redevelopment Plan. • Stimulate and provide new private investment opportunities by revitalizing property characterized by deterioration, blight or functional obsolescence and to encourage continued investment in the Project Area where growth is planned. • Improve the visual image of the City and, specifically, the Project Area by reinforcing existing assets and by expanding the potentials of the Project Area. • Improve employment opportunities, economic stability and productivity and increase public revenues within the Project Area. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-9 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Eliminate environmental deficiencies by achieving a coordinated pattern of residential, commercial, industrial and public land uses in the Project Area with adequate public improvements including, but not limited to, streets, utilities and flood control improvements. Foster the development of a sense of community identity within the Project Area. Preserve and enhance conditions in residential neighborhoods. • Ensure a variety of commercial, office and/or industrial land uses which will physically and economically complement development within the Project Area. • Encourage the development of commercial uses along major thoroughfares in accordance with applicable land use policies and zoning regulations. • Encourage the use of local resources such as the local labor force, services and materials in the development of the Project Area whenever economically feasible. • Promote development in accordance with General Plan goals and policies. 3. Bicycle Plan The following major goals will also be pursued by the Agency, as set forth in the 2000 City of Petaluma Bicycle Plan: • Create and maintain a safe, comprehensive and integrated bicycle and pedestrian system throughout the City. • Develop facilities, policies and standards by which Petaluma and the surrounding Planning Area can reduce auto dependency, acknowledging that to do so will improve the livability of Petaluma and its environs. • Ensure that the Bicycle Plan is implemented in a timely fashion. • Incorporate bicycle and pedestrian access as part of the initial planning and design process for all development proposals and capital improvement projects. 4. River Access and Enhancement Plan In addition, the following major goals will be pursued by the Agency, as set forth in the 1996 City of Petaluma River Access and Enhancement Plan: • Maintain the navigability of the Petaluma River. • Improve flood control. • Promote balanced use of the River Corridor. • Restore, create and protect natural habitats and enhance native vegetation along the River Corridor. • Expand public access to and awareness of the river. • Assure permanent maintenance and promote public safety along the river. • Create guidelines to integrate development into the River Corridor. • Preserve the economic viability of property within the River Corridor. • Identify sources and strategies for funding and implementing the Petaluma River Access and Enhancement Plan. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-10 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 E. Conformity with the General Plan and Central Petaluma Specific Plan The Amended Redevelopment Plan and the Redevelopment Program projects and activities enabled by the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger have been designed to coordinate with and directly support the implementation of the City's General Plan and the Central Petaluma Specific Plan. The existing General Plan, which has guided development in the City and its surroundings since 1987, has reached its time horizon of 2005. While many of the existing Plan policies are still relevant, its context and setting have changed. The City is now updating the General Plan to reflect changed conditions and establish the community's vision for the future. The new Draft General Plan and accompanying Environmental Impact Report (EIR) are anticipated to be completed and available for public review and comment by April 2006. The new General Plan will guide Petaluma's physical development with a strong focus on sustainability. The City Council identified the main priorities of the General Plan as management of water resources, transportation systems and economic health. Specific objectives identified by the Council for the General Plan update include: • Linking land use and transportation decisions so that infrastructure improvements support urban development. • Ensuring infrastructure is provided and maintained in a manner that improves and maintains the local quality of life. • Guiding development in a manner that minimizes impacts to the natural environment. • Managing water resources in a way that ensures a reliable water supply, improves water quality and minimizes flood hazards. • Improving connectivity and accessibility and working to reduce automobile dependence. • Providing and maintaining a diverse range of recreational facilities throughout the City. • Facilitating construction of a diversity of housing types, including affordable housing. • Enhancing community safety. The Central Petaluma Specific Plan, adopted June 2, 2003, amended the existing General Plan with specific goals and objectives to guide future development in the central portion of the City. As shown in Figure I-3, the Central Petaluma Specific Plan boundaries encompass the majority of the CBD and a small portion of the PCD. The Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger will also help the city achieve the following goals, objectives and policies of the Specific Plan as summarized below. Land Use • Support existing viable uses, and provide for new uses that complement and complete the urban fabric. • Provide for a mix of new uses. • Encourage intensification appropriate to the area's central location. • Encourage flexibility in building form and in the nature of activities to allow for innovation and the ability to change over time. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-i l Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 cn U O I.M CQ O Public Space & River Access • Establish a continuous and interconnected system of public spaces along the river. • Provide urban public spaces that serve multiple purposes. • Complete a recreational loop on both sides of the river, including multiple gathering areas of various sizes. • Enhance the public space character of City streets. Circulation • Support diversity in the transportation system. • Reduce the barrier effect of the diverse transportation corridors. • Reinforce the role of Central Petaluma as a center for transit and non -vehicular modes of travel. • Complete the urban pattern with a pedestrian -scaled grid of streets. • Establish the Petaluma Train Depot as the City's transit hub, accommodating rail transit as well as regional and local bus service. • Provide a street system that strengthens the existing roadway network, serves new development and balances the need for through movement with livability and pedestrian/bicycle orientation. • Improve pedestrian and bicycle circulation. • Maximize opportunities for shared parking. Utilities and Public Services • Construct an adequate water system to provide service and fire flow capacity to serve new development. • Construct an adequate sewer system to accommodate existing and new development. • Construct an adequate storm drain system to collect flows and direct them to the river. • Provide for the underground installation of electric, natural gas and telecommunications lines in a joint trench as existing streets are excavated for placement of other utilities and whenever new streets are developed. The projects and activities of the Redevelopment Program are consistent with the General Plan and Central Petaluma Specific Plan. The Project Areas will continue to be subject to the basic land use designations and standards for development as set forth in the General Plan, the City Zoning Ordinance, and other City land use and building ordinances and regulations. Residential densities, building intensities, and building standards under the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger will remain consistent with City land use and building ordinances and regulations. F. Preliminary Report Requirements This Preliminary Report is designed to comply with the CRL. Pursuant to Section 33344.5, a preliminary report must demonstrate how a proposed redevelopment plan adoption (or amendment) meets several requirements. These legal requirements and a description of how this Preliminary Report is organized to meet these requirements follow. Excerpts from the CRL are referenced and italicized. Petaluma Community Development Commission I-13 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 1. Reasons for the Plan Amendments The reasons for the selection of the project area. Section 33344.5(a) The reasons for amending and fiscally merging the existing Redevelopment Plans are described in Section C above, and in Chapter II. 2. Physical and Economic Conditions in the Project Area A description of the physical and economic conditions existing in the project area. Section 33344.5(b) This report includes a description of the blighting conditions in the Project Areas at the time of original adoption and amendment, a summary of redevelopment activities to date, and description of the remaining blight in the Project Areas. This information is provided in Chapter II. The evidence provided in this Preliminary Report demonstrates that both Project Areas contain adverse physical and economic conditions sufficient to support a finding that significant blight remains within certain portions of the Project Areas. 3. Proposed Projects and Blight Alleviation A description of the specific project or projects then proposed by the agency. Section 33344.5(e) A description of ho v the project or projects to be pursued by the agency in the project area will improve o- alleviate the conditions described in subdivision (b). Section 33344.5()9 Chapter III of this Preliminary Report provides descriptions and preliminary cost estimates of the Redevelopment Program projects and activities to be undertaken by the Agency as a means to alleviate adverse conditions within the Project Areas if the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger are adopted. As described earlier, the Redevelopment Program for the Project Areas will not be modified by this Amendment. For ease of administration and to facilitate implementation, the projects and activities for the individual Project Areas have been synthesized into one Redevelopment Program. Chapter III demonstrates how the redevelopment activities will help alleviate adverse conditions in the Project Areas by linking specific Redevelopment Program components with identified adverse conditions. 4. Proposed Method of Financing A prelinninay assessment of the proposed nnethod offuna ting the redevelopment of the project area, inchuding an assessment of the economic feasibility of the project and the reasons for including a provision for the division of!aces pursuant to Section 33670 in the Redevelopment Plan. Section 33344.5(d) Chapter IV of this report describes the proposed methods of financing the proposed projects and activities in the Project Areas if the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger are adopted. It demonstrates the financial feasibility of the Redevelopment Program by comparing available funding sources for the Project Areas with projected costs of the Redevelopment Program. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-14 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 G. Overview of the Redevelopment Plan Amendment Process As defined by the CRL, the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger for the CBD and PCD are considered "major" amendments, which require an adoption process that parallels the adoption of a new redevelopment plan (CRL Section 33354.6). This process includes the preparation of this Preliminary Report and the report to the legislative body (the Report to Council). Amending a redevelopment plan involves a complex statutorily -mandated process designed to provide a community's legislative body with the necessary analysis and input to make informed decisions about the purpose, scope and content of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger and, ultimately, about whether to adopt the Plan Amendments. The procedures and documentation required in a redevelopment plan amendment are similar to the adoption of an initial redevelopment plan. The following briefly describes the reports and steps in the redevelopment plan amendment process: 1. Proiect Area Committee Formation The CRL requires that a Project Area Committee (PAC) is formed when the area proposed for redevelopment contains a substantial number of low or moderate income households, and the Redevelopment Plan (or Plan Amendment) will contain authority for the agency to acquire, by eminent domain, property on which these persons reside. A PAC is also required if the Redevelopment Plan (or Plan Amendment) contains one or more public projects that will displace a substantial number of low or moderate income persons, or both. A PAC is not required because the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger will not extend eminent domain authority over properties on which persons reside, and the Agency will not undertake projects that would displace a substantial number of low and moderate income residents. 2. Preliminary Report The Preliminary Report describes the purpose and impact of the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. It is the first major background document in the process to the approval of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. The Preliminary Report is designed to provide members of the City Council, other governmental bodies, affected taxing entities, community leaders, and interested citizens with an early statement of comprehensive background information on the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. 3. Environmental Review The proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger are within the scope of other previous environmental reviews, including the reviews for the Petaluma General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the program level EIR for the Central Petaluma Specific Plan, the PCD Project EER and the CBD Plan Amendment EIR. No new effects will occur in the Project Areas and no new mitigation measures will be required because the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger will not alter the implementation of the Redevelopment Plans, do not propose any land use changes to those already analyzed in the current General Plan, and do not modify the existing Redevelopment Programs. Therefore, additional environmental review was not required. 4. Redevelopment Plan Amendments The Redevelopment Plan Amendments are the legal documents setting forth the basic goals, powers and limitations with which the Agency must conduct its activities over the life of the Redevelopment Projects. Toward the conclusion of the consultation with taxing entities, the environmental review, and the community participation process, the Agency must submit the proposed Plan Amendments to the Planning Commission and the City Council in preparation for the public hearing and consideration of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-15 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 5. Taxing Entitv Consultation Agency staff consults with affected taxing entities. 6. Report to Council The Report to Council is a report to the City Council that describes the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger and presents the updated information from the Preliminary Report, the Five Year Implementation Plan and additional chapters addressing specific requirements of the CRL. 7. Petaluma Community Development Commission and City Council Hearing The Petaluma Community Development Commission Board (PCDC Board) and City Council consent to holding the joint public hearing on the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, and the PCDC publicly notices the hearing. 8. Petaluma Communitv Development Commission ADuroval and Transmittal PCDC Board approves the Report to Council and transmits the Plan Amendments to the Planning Commission for its report and recommendation and authorizes transmittal of the Plan Amendments and the Report to Council to the City Council. 9. General Plan Conformitv The Planning Commission considers the Plan Amendments for their conformance with the General Plan and makes a recommendation on approval and adoption of the Plan Amendments. 10. Ordinance Adoption The City Council and the PCDC Board hold the joint public hearing on the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger and the City Council makes the required findings and adopts the ordinance amending the Redevelopment Plans. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1-16 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 II. Existing Conditions This chapter describes existing conditions in the Central Business District (CBD) and Petaluma Community Development (PCD) Project Areas. It presents information on conditions in the Projects Areas (both CBD and PCD), including blighting conditions at the time of Redevelopment Plan adoption and amendment, redevelopment activities to date and a description of remaining blighting conditions within the boundaries of the Project Areas. The most prevalent remaining blighting conditions in the Project Areas include aged, deteriorated and dilapidated structures; factors inhibiting the proper use of buildings or lots; incompatible uses; irregularly shaped lots; impaired investments such as hazardous materials contamination; economic indicators of distressed buildings and lots; and inadequate public improvements and facilities, all of which cannot be remedied by private or governmental action without continued redevelopment assistance. Although the PCDC has made progress in mitigating these adverse conditions in the Project Areas, blighting conditions necessitate the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger described in this Preliminary Report. Supported by a review of available documents and data, maps, field reconnaissance surveys, surveys of real estate professionals active in the area and discussions with City staff, the description of adverse physical and economic blighting conditions contained in this chapterjustify continued redevelopment action and provides substantial evidence for findings necessary for adoption of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. As described in Chapter I, the CBD Redevelopment Plan was adopted on September 27, 1976 and area was added to the Project on June 18, 2001.' The Project Area adopted in 1976 is referred to throughout the chapter as the 1976 Original Area, and the area added to the CBD Redevelopment Project in 2001 is referred to as the 2001 Added Area. The PCD has not been amended to add area since its adoption in 1988. The CBD 1976 Original Area and PCD were both adopted prior to 1994 modifications to the CRL blight definitions. As further described in this chapter, the remaining blighting conditions for the CBD 1976 Original Area and PCD are described according to the current CRL blight definitions, although the CRL only requires these blight descriptions based on the definitions at the time of Plan Adoption. The CBD 1976 Original Area and PCD blight findings are cross-referenced with the blight definitions at the time of Plan Adoption. The remaining blighting conditions for the CBD 1976 Original Area and 2001 Added Area are discussed in terms of the Project Area as a whole. A. Introduction 1. Organization This chapter is organized into the following sections: A. Introduction and summary of the current CRL requirements for the Preliminary Report related to urbanization and blight findings, as well as the methodology used to prepare this chapter. B. Blight factors affecting the Project Areas, including natural conditions that have contributed to adverse conditions in the areas. ' The Redevelopment Plan was also amended on November 21, 1994 and July 21, 1999 but these amendments did not add area. Petaluma Community Development Commission II -1 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 C. CBD blight findings at the time of the Redevelopment Plan's adoption and amendment, synopsis of PCDC redevelopment projects and activities to date, and analysis of remaining blight. D. PCD blight findings at the time of the Redevelopment Plan's adoption and amendment, synopsis of PCDC redevelopment projects and activities to date, and analysis of remaining blight. E. Conclusions for blight findings. 2. Relevant Provisions of the CRL For plans that use tax increment financing, amendments that add new territory to the project area, increase the limit of dollars to be allocated to the PCDC, lengthen the time limit to incur debt or plan effectiveness, merge project areas or add significant additional capital improvement projects, CRL Section 33354.6(a) requires an agency to follow the same procedures as those required for a new plan adoption. CRL Sections 33485 through 33489 set forth the procedures and requirements for fiscally merging project areas for purposes of pooling the tax increment revenue from separate project areas. CRL Sections 33344.5 and 33354.6(a) require the preliminary report to include a description of the physical and economic conditions in the Project Areas. CRL Section 33457.1 further clarifies the Section 33352 requirement under a redevelopment plan amendment by requiring that the reports and information required by CRL Section 33352 be prepared to the extent warranted by the proposed amendment.'- (Excerpts from the CRL are italicized.) a. CRL Urbanization Requirement As of 1984, the CRL requires a determination that a proposed project area or area proposed to be added to an existing project area is predominantly urbanized. The current CRL requires that at least 80 percent of the area in a redevelopment project be predominantly urbanized.' The CBD was adopted in 1976, before the CRL required a determination that a project area or area added to an existing project area be predominately urbanized. At the time of the plan amendment process, the 2001 Added Area was found to be predominately urbanized, thus meeting the requirement that at least 80 percent of the area be urbanized. In addition, the PCD was found to be predominantly urbanized, with more than 80 percent of the land either developed for urban uses or an integral part of an area developed for urban uses at the time of plan adoption. The CRL requires no further urbanization finding for the Project Areas in connection with the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. '' CRL Section 33354.6(6) states that plan amendments pursued for the purpose of increasing the limit on the number of dollars to be allocated to the redevelopment agency must identify the areas no longer blighted. Since this plan amendment and fiscal merger is not increasing the limit of tax increment allocated to the agency, this Preliminary Report is not required to identify areas that are no longer blighted. 3 The CRL, however, does not require an assessment of the extent of urbanization for a project area where no territory is being added. Therefore, this Preliminary Report is not required to include a detailed assessment of the extent of urbanization for the CBD or PCD, since the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger is not proposing to add territory to the Project Areas. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-2 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 b. CRL Requirement for Description of Physical and Economic Conditions The City Council adopted the CBD 1976 Original Area and PCD prior to 1994 modifications to the CRL blight definitions. The CBD was amended to add territory in April 2001, under the current CRL requirements.' In this Preliminary Report, the review of adverse conditions in the Project Areas at the time of plan adoption is discussed in terms of the definitions in effect at the time of plan adoption. The documentation of remaining blight in the CBD is discussed in terms of current CRL blight definitions, and the 1976 Original Area is cross-referenced with the definitions in effect at the time of plan adoption. The documentation of remaining blight in the CBD Original 1976 Original Area PCD is also discussed in terms of current CRL blight definitions and cross-referenced with the definitions in effect at the time of plan adoption. The Preliminary Report must include a description of the physical and economic conditions remaining in the CBD and PCD. The current CRL blight definitions are presented in this subsection, along with the CRL provision on inadequate public improvements.' a.1 Characteristics of a Blighted Area Section 33030 of the CRL describes the standards for and the characteristics of blighted areas: (a) It is fotnnd and declared tliat there exist in many coannanities bliglited areas which constitute physical and economic liabilities, requiring redevelopment in the interest of the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of these communities and of the state. [33030(a)] (b) A blighted area is one that contains both of the following: (1) An area that is predominately urbanized, as that teen is defined in Section 33320. 1, and is an area in which the combination of conditions set forth in Section 33031 is so prevalent and so substantial that it causes a reduction of, or lack of, proper utilization of the area to such an artent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment. [33030(b)(a)J (2) An area that is characterized by either of the following: (A) One or more conditions set forth in any paragraph of subdivision (a) of Section 33031 and one or more conditions set forth in any paragraph of subdivision (h) of Section 33031. [33030(b)(2)(A)J (B) The condition described in paragraph (4) ofstrbdivision (a) of Section 33031. [33030(b)(2)(B)J (C) A blighted area also stay be one that contains the conditions described in subdivision (b) mrd is, in addition, characterized by the existence of inadequate public improvennents, parkingfacilities, or utilities. [33030(c)] 4 The PCD was amended in April 2000 to clarify the Redevelopment Plan's language to more effectively accomplish the PCDC's objectives. However, the Plan Amendment did not add territory. ' The PCD blight findings will be cross referenced with the blight definitions in effect at the time of plan adoption in 1988. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-3 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 a.2 Conditions that Can Be Used as Evidence of Blight CRL Section 33031 describes both physical and economic conditions that can be used as evidence of blight: Phvsical Conditions Deficient or Deteriorated Buildings Buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. These conditions can be caused by serious building code violations, dilapidation and deterioration, defective design at* physical construction faulty m- inadequate utilities, or other similar factors. [33031(a) (1)] Factors that Inhibit Proper Use of Buildings or Lots Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. This condition can be caused by a substandard design, inadequate size given present standards and market conditions, lack ofparking, or other similar factors. [33031(a)(2)] Incompatible Uses Adjacent or nearby uses that are incompatible with each other and which prevent the economic development of thoseparcels or other portions of the project area. [33031(x)(3)] Substandard Lots in Multiple Ownership The existence of subdivided lots of in-egularform and shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development that are in multiple ownership. [33031(a)(4)] Economic Conditions Depreciated Values/Impaired Investments Depreciated or stagnant property values or impaired investments, including, but not necessarily limited to, those properties containing hazardous wastes that require the use of agency authority as specified inn Article 12.5 (commencing with Section 33459). [33031(b)(1)] Economic Indicators of Distressed Buildings or Lots Abrnor-rnally high business vacancies, abnormally low lease rates, high turnover rates, abandoned buildings, or excessive vacant lots within an area developed for urban use and served by ittilities. [33031(b) (2)] • Lack of Neighborhood Commercial Facilities A lack of necessay commercial facilities that are normally found in neighborhoods, including grocery stores, drug stores, and banks and other lending institutions. [33031(b)(3)] Residential Overcrowding or Problem Businesses Residential overcrowding o- an excess of bars, liquor stores, or other businesses that cater exclusively to adults, that has led to problems ofpublic safety and we fare. [33031(b)(4)] A High Crime Rate A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and we fare. [33031(b)(5)] Inadeouate Public Improvements Prior to 1994, inadequate public improvements was a factor of blight under the CRL, and the PCDC made findings that the CBD 1976 Original Area and PCD exhibited this blighting condition. This blighting condition continues to exist in these areas and is described as a blighting condition. Petaluma Community Development Commission 114 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Under current blight definitions in the CRL, the presence of inadequate public improvements cannot be the sole reason for establishment of a redevelopment project area. However, CRL Section 33030(c) permits consideration of inadequate public improvements when blighting conditions exist in a project area. Inadequate public improvements may be a contributing factor to blight, and an agency may undertake needed public improvements to alleviate blight. This applies to the CBD 2001 Added Area. To the extent they are present, inadequate public improvements typically reflect problems that exaggerate the effects of blight. A blighted area also may be one that contains tlne coiiditiois described in subdivision (b) and is, iii addition, characterized by the existence of inadequate public improvements, parking facilities, or utilities. [33030(c)] 3. Methodology The description of remaining physical and economic blighting conditions contained in this chapter is supported by: • Field reconnaissance surveys of the Project Areas to identify adverse physical and economic conditions. Review of available documents, including City reports, studies and plans. (Refer to Appendix A.) • Discussions with City and PCDC staff. Analysis of economic and other data. • Surveys of real estate professionals. • Examination of maps. Photographic documentation. (Refer to Appendix B.) 4. Figures and Photographs of Blighting Conditions The figures throughout this chapter summarize and locate (or map) blighting conditions that are remaining in the Project Areas. The map of blighting conditions has been broken into these separate figures for ease of reading and reference. The individual figures, taken together, demonstrate that blighting conditions are prevalent throughout, and affect properties in the Project Areas.' Over 200 photographs documenting adverse physical and economic conditions remaining in the Project Areas are presented in Appendix B. Figure II -I shows the location of the photographs documenting the CBD and Figure 1I-2 shows the location of the photographs documenting the PCD. Not only do these photographs and related figures demonstrate that physical and economic blight is prevalent, they also show conditions and buildings that could benefit from redevelopment sponsored activities such as development of vacant or underutilized parcels, building rehabilitation, and public improvements. The photographs represent conditions in the CBD and PCD providing further evidence of the presence of physical and observed economic blighting conditions. b The Report to Council, to be prepared subsequent to the Preliminary Report, must include a map showing where the blighting conditions exist, as reunited by CRL Section 33352(b). Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-5 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 N bJD 0 10 jr F7. 60 O 72 . . . . . . . . . . . O C-10 0 u u B. Blighting Factors Affecting the Project Areas Several factors contribute to the remaining blighting conditions in both the CBD and PCD, including factors that inhibit proper use of buildings or lots and historical influences on land uses and development. 1. Factors Inhibiting Proper Use of Buildings or Lots [33031(a)(2)] Factors that inhibit the proper use of buildings or lots in the Project Areas include earthquake hazards, poor soil conditions, and flood hazards. a. Earthquake Hazards and Poor Soil Conditions Significant earthquake hazards affect the Project Areas, including nearby earthquake faults, the high probability of future earthquakes, and soil conditions that tend to amplify shaking during a seismic event and have the potential for liquefaction. These conditions contribute to the blighting factor of unsafe and unhealthy buildings. As a result of these conditions, older buildings in the Project Areas do not always perform adequately and can be unsafe and unhealthy in the event of an earthquake. See below for further description of building conditions susceptible to damage in an earthquake. a.1 Potentially Dangerous Earthquake Faults in Proximity The probability for one or more magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquakes in the San Francisco Bay Region from 2003 to 2032 is 62 percent. Two active faults can be expected to significantly affect the Project Areas. The San Andreas Fault, California's longest and most active fault, and the Healdsburg-Rodgers Creek Fault. The 1906 and 1989 earthquakes were produced by the San Andreas Fault, which has a 21 percent probability of generating a magnitude 6.7 or higher earthquake before 2032. The major fault zones of the San Andreas Fault have been the sources of most of the earthquakes recently felt in Petaluma and are expected to continue to be the sources of future felt earthquakes .7 The Healdsburg-Rodgers Creek Fault is the most hazardous system in the Bay Area, with a likelihood of 27 percent for a magnitude 6.7 or higher earthquake in the next thirty years. Major activity along this fault is likely to cause extensive structural damage in the region, including Petaluma.e Figure 11-3 shows the known earthquake faults located near the Project Areas and the probability of future earthquakes on these faults. a.2 Adverse Soil Conditions The principal types of earthquake -induced hazards that may occur in the Project Areas are ground shaking and liquefaction. The severity of shaking is influenced by a number of factors, including the duration and intensity of the earthquake, the proximity of the site to the location of the earthquake, and the type of geologic materials underlying the site. r Petaluma General Plan 2025: Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Challenges Report, October 10, 2002, p. 13-21. s Earthquake Probabilities in the San Francisco Bay Region: 2002-2031, U.S. Geological Survey Open -File Report 03-214, Chapter 7, p. 4. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-8 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Figure 11-3 Location of Petaluma Project Areas Relative to Earthquake Faults and Probabilities San Francisco Bay Region f, SANTA �r.• ansA I ,1 he'fnll�nln LOCATION OF .-PROJECT AREAS i 0 c, NnVA'rI t' i7% VA[ ill'h.M , _ t " (1 SA14i,tin�` ANTIC)Ct1 WATJ 1-1 Cltrth IIA\ rit,%cN, l \ \ 3 %o trnr.rnannt,r- `� � - 11, BA\°- w't,u 10%7. probabilih for one ormorc magndudc 6. 1 or greater '- catlhgoaku from 20113 to 2032. SANTA CRUl. This residt incotpmniles 149(*aodds \VA'1SUNVILCIIT CAS of earthquakes not on shown faulls - _ 1. - 1\9onterey Bay Probability of magnitude 6.7 or gmacr earthquakes before 2032 on indicated fault-WiIYWp'1d61�JIn1Yi�(.diN1Y11 source: U.S. Geological Sun e.�. Working Group on C'abfomia Earthquake Probabililies.2003- Seifel S rncamimma. N Petaluma Community Development Commissimi 11-9 Prelindnan' Rcpotl Petaluma Plan Amendmems and fiscal Nlemer April 2006 The Project Areas are largely underlain by Holocene Bay mud and Holocene alluvium. These types of geologic materials may damage existing buildings, utilities and roads. Alluvium is a mixture of stiff clays, silts, gravel and sands, this type of clay -rich soil can shrink and swell may cause gradual cracking, settling and weakening of buildings. Bay mud provides very little load bearing strength and any small loading applied on this soil can cause a long-term ground settlement. Differential settlement can damage building foundations, disturb underground utilities and cause settlement in streets and roads. Differential settlement is of particular concern in areas that have not previously supported structures and where new structures would place heavier loads than existed in the past. Groundshakine Amplification Seismic groundshaking could cause deformation of the ground surface and major damage to existing and proposed structures, potentially injuring those nearby. Groundshaking could potentially expose people and property to seismic -related hazards, including localized liquefaction (see below for definition) and related ground failure. Earthquake shaking scenarios were mapped by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Earthquake program in June 2004 based on the proximity of various faults and soil characteristics. As shown in Figure H-3 on the previous page, the Rodgers Creek Fault has the highest probability of an earthquake of magnitude 6.7 or greater of all the major Bay Area faults. This fault line is located to the east of the Project Areas. A scenario with a magnitude 7.0 earthquake on the Rodgers Creek Fault would produce very strong to violent ground shaking in the CBD and very strong shaking throughout most of the PCD.' Refer to Figure II -4 for a map of this ground shaking scenario in relationship to the two Project Areas. As shown, both Project Areas will be strongly affected by such an earthquake, as well as by an earthquake on the San Andreas Fault located to the west of the Project Areas. Liquefaction Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon in which saturated, cohesionless soils lose their strength, especially during shaking induced by earthquakes. In the process, the soil acquires mobility sufficient to permit both horizontal and vertical movements if not confined. The soil may become like quicksand and have little bearing strength. It may cause differential settlement, sliding along liquefied layers and/or cause buildings and structures to tilt, subside and move laterally. Soils most susceptible to liquefaction are Bay fills, Bay mud and unconsolidated alluvium. The potential for liquefaction increases when the groundwater is less than 50 feet. The regional groundwater table in Petaluma is generally 10 to 20 feet below the ground surface.10 Liquefaction susceptibility was also mapped by the ABAG Earthquake program in June 2004. The susceptibility levels in the CBD and PCD are high to very high for most of the Project Areas, as shown in Figure 11-5. The liquefaction susceptibility is highest in central Petaluma along the Petaluma River, the Highway 101 Corridor and in the downtown. ' ABAG Earthquake Program, Earthquake Shaking Scenario on the Rodgers Creek Fault, Magnitude 7.0, April 2004. 10 Petaluma General Plan 2025: Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Challenges Report, October 10, 2002, p. 13-27. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-10 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Figure 11-4 Location of Petaluma Project Areas Relative to Severity of Earthquake Shaking Sources ABAG Earthquake Program. Earthgnals Slinking Scmairio: Rodgers Creek Fault. Magnitude 7.0. June 2004. Petaluma Coni n mile Dceclopmenl Commission 11-11 Preliminan Report Pctalunm Plan Amcndmcnls and Fiscal Merger April 2006 a.3 Potentially Hazardous Buildings Unreinforced masonry buildings CURMs) and buildings constructed in the early to mid -1900s would be expected to incur the greatest structural damage during an earthquake. URMs are typically constructed of brick, hollow tile, or concrete block. These buildings have proved to be particularly hazardous during an earthquake. California law now requires towns, cities, and counties to identify unreinforced masonry buildings and to take steps to ensure their reinforcement to a level that provides a reasonable level of safety during a seismic event. The City adopted the state retrofit standards in 1992 as part of Ordinance No. 1882 N.C.S. Even though retrofitting provides additional levels of safety, compliance with State retrofit standards does not necessarily prevent loss of life or injury or prevent earthquake damage to rehabilitated buildings." As of July 2005, the City had identified 44 URMs in the Project Areas. Of these buildings, 13 properties had been seismically retrofitted, 9 properties were considered "projects in progress," and 21 properties still had not been retrofitted. Therefore, approximately 50 percent of the identified URMs in the Project Areas are not adequately retrofitted, and are likely unsafe in the event of a significant seismic event. Figure U-6 shows the location of the URMs in the Project Areas that have not been retrofitted to date. Further, even though improvements have been made, the partially retrofitted URMs can still be hazardous during an earthquake. Recent earthquakes in California have demonstrated that other building types can also be unsafe and hazardous. Such buildings include aging wood frame structures with inadequate foundation connections, soft story buildings, older poured concrete buildings without adequate reinforcement, badly connected concrete tilt -up buildings, poorly engineered concrete parking structures, and informally constructed or poorly engineered buildings.t'- Negative conditions found in these buildings include cripple walls, dry rot or termite damage, poor design, or substandard construction. These conditions, often found in older buildings, make the buildings more susceptible to earthquake damage. a.4 Cost of Reducing Impact of Earthquake Hazards on Project Areas The cost of addressing earthquake hazards and liquefaction conditions in many portions of the Project Areas is likely substantial. Settlements or instability can be mitigated by typical construction methods such as pre -loading, deep foundations and improvement of soil conditions. Furthermore, liquefaction potential is typically mitigated by grouting, vibro-floatation, stone columns, dynamic deep compaction, deep soil mixing, and removal and re -compaction of loose soil. These conditions represent significant cost implications for development projects located on the various soil types found within the Project Areas. They also contribute to the blighting condition of unsafe and unhealthy buildings in the Project Areas. " Ordinance No. 1882 N.C.S.: An ordinance of the City of Petaluma adding Section 17.34 to the Petaluma Municipal Code pertaining to the seismic strengthening of Unreinforced Masonry Buildings, March 17, 1992. 1' According to the Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (SERI), soft story buildings are buildings with unusually weak stories, which can easily collapse in an earthquake. The ground floor is the most common location for a soft -story, which is usually due to tuck -under parking or large commercial spaces. Many soft -story buildings collapsed in the 1989 Loma Priem and 1994 Northridge earthquakes. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-13 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Hun re 11-6 m UnreinforcedlWasom-y Builings in CBD and PCD . ......... :C) —.dkl -77- 0 UimJnfbrccd Masonry Building CBI).. .. ..... ... OPCI) Seifel I I I ulln I Ill i PI I N Source: cit). or Pcwmma. N 13claluma Commimit ' N. Dm-clopnicol Commission 11-14 Prefiminar\ Rcpoil Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2000 b. Flood Hazards Flooding in Petaluma has long been a problem for both residents and businesses. Historically, potential flooding is a factor that has hindered development in Central Petaluma, including the Project Areas. 13 Recent damaging floods have taken place in 1982, 1986, 1998, and 2005 and most of the flooding and resulting flood damage have taken place in the PCD and in low lying areas along the Petaluma River in the CBD. Typically such flooding occurs during periods of heavy rainfall when high tides on the river restrict drainage. Extreme damage to roads has occurred during nearly all of the major flooding events in the past 20 years." Repetitive losses (at least two filings in a ten year period for damages in excess of $1,000) have occurred in 20 properties from 1978 to 2001, all of which are located in the PCD. The flooding in 1982 resulted in damages of approximately $28 million, with an additional $1 million in damages in 1986 and $6 million in 1998.15 The most recent flood on December 31, 2005, which resulted in approximately $56 million in damages, caused the City to declare a state of emergency and close numerous flooded streets, as well as a portion of Highway 101. Numerous businesses suffered inventory and structural damage, including the Petaluma Auto Plaza the Petaluma Premium Factory Outlets, the Petaluma North Shopping Center and Petaluma Plaza in the PCD.16 Residences were also damaged, including homes in four mobile home parks in the PCD (Youngstown, Leisure Lake, Capri Villa, and Petaluma Estates). Flooding resulted in unsafe and unhealthy conditions, including mold growth, rained insulation and other potentially toxic contamination. During clean up, many residents were observed disposing of and handling potentially toxic materials without taking proper safety precautions." Appendix B, photographs 73-75 and 195-203 document some of the 2005 flood damage in the CBD and PCD. The Federal Emergency Management Agency designated a significant amount of land in Petaluma as part of the 100 -year floodplain, where floods have a one percent chance of occurring in any year. Construction within the 100 -year floodplain is required by the City to be elevated such that the first flood pad elevation is one foot above the 100 -year flood level." See Figure H-7 for the 100 -year floodplain map. Through the efforts of the City and the PCDC, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has undertaken a $40 million flood control project to reduce flooding within the Payran Reach area in the PCD where the land was subject to flooding at average 65 -year flood event levels. The 65 -year flood has a higher likelihood of occurring than the 100 -year flood, or approximately a 1.5 percent chance of occurring each year. Approximate boundaries of the areas that will be improved adjacent to the Petaluma River extend from Jess Avenue to the north to the old mainline Railroad Bridge south of Lakeville Street. Flood control activities include widening 3,500 feet of the river, constructing steel sheet -pile floodwalls and a concrete weir, and upgrading bridges that restrict the river's flow. The Corps estimates that construction should be complete in late 2006 or early 2007.19 The PCDC has significantly contributed to this effort. The Corps flood control project does not remediate all of the areas in Petaluma that are subject to flood risks, as evidenced by the damage from flooding during 2005. Many parts of the CBD and PDC will continue to be unprotected from the 100 -year flood, unless properties are elevated by a range of 1-5 feet or more .21 ° Central Petaluma Specific Plan, City of Petaluma, lune 2, 2003, p.74. 14 City of Petaluma Floodplain Management Plan, Schaff and Wheeler, October 2001, p.12. 15 Ibid., pp. 13-14 and 22. 16,, City Mops up from Flood," Petaluma Argus -Courier, January 4, 2006. 17 "Seniors in Mobile Home Parks Urged to be Careful When Making Repairs," Petaluma Argus -Courier, February 15, 2006. 18 Central Petaluma Specific Plan, City of Petaluma, June 2, 2003, p. 74. 19 "Understanding How and Why The River Floods," Petaluma Argus -Courier, May 19, 2004. 20 Central Petaluma Specific Plan, City of Petaluma, lune 2, 2003, p. 17 Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-15 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Figure 11-7 Location of 100-Year Floodplain Boundary Relative to Petaluma Project Area IIIA `� �u1Cl(I;ylpru-, 1'!� i@o i to III 1 ;;.;;II , °ull Ilamlluil illiilj) Ai,l l!Illy!!Ih' l!11;I;Inil111,5illlllli1' Il!ll 11 I (I1'i!1, illi, l'lilll7!�il ,1!1111 ,� Inl IIII�IIIII!I�' '11111,!11 llllaf:�jl!�I�II!IIIIIII!0'I�II' LJ` . ' .�,�. I;Illili!i'!�;I'�''1j171.I,IVI(1I��Ilillllll4�hll1!i1�I'II!U';�!I , (lllj'! IIIIII!, hj!I�;;u,�q,, 11111�'!b,Ih, f j'�I�I I!11111!Il�hiii1j1N1 ��4IIjI�I��qjiIIQ11�; 91!71�Ii 114 m1,;41h!4!II+"",;p°'u� V U I �IIII GI Glu�!1116�,�4ul,h n, �,II I ✓wh I +i� �o1i,111511111 �P ' ' ;h11'lt;ll I,l"1111 it VIII, P�Ililiii€nro-)'car Floodplain Lak 1I ,n "I' cvillcIitvq �`,, . .]PCD ®CBD Seifel '� IIII ,.nunA1MI;RK N �1 Source: Pclnluma Connnonitc Development Commission. Petofonm Conunoniq Development Commission II-16 Preliminary Reporl Pclafome Plan Anrcndnsnls and Fiscal Merger April 2000 C. Historical Influences on Land Use and Development This section describes the historical influences on land use and development in Petaluma and within the two Project Areas. Unless otherwise noted, this information comes from Petaluma General Plan 2025: Existing Conditions, Opportunities, and Challenges Report, 2002 and Images of America: Petaluma, by Simone Wilson, 2001. c.1 Early History For several thousand years, the Coast Miwok native people inhabited Marin County and southern Sonoma County, where Petaluma is located. Spanish settlers followed by Mexican ranchos arrived in Petaluma and other California cities in the 18'h century. Following the transfer of California from Mexico to the United States, American settlers arrived in the Petaluma area during the time of the Gold Rush. Initially a primitive camp was established by a group of hunters in 1850 near the location of the present- day Lakeville Street Bridge, and soon aflerwards, others followed seeking hunting fields and ranch lands. As more people flocked to the Petaluma area, a trading post was built, and settlement of the area got underway. c.2 Beginnings of Petaluma as a City Modes of transportation have shaped the economic and physical topography of the City of Petaluma. Petaluma's evolution was predicated on the Petaluma River and the link it provided to San Francisco. The City grew on the banks of the Petaluma River. Its unique topography, in conjunction with its proximity to neighboring towns such as Cotati and Penngrove, made Petaluma a prosperous hub of commerce and distribution to the region. In 1852, Garrett Keller surveyed the area, platted a 40 -acre site and sold lots for $10 a piece. The streets were laid out perpendicular to the river, creating a road network radiating outward from the river. In recent years, this early street pattern has created accessibility problems and circulation issues near the river. Petaluma was incorporated in 1858 with approximately 1,340 residents and became a center for production. The riverbank was crowded with piers, boat landings, and local manufacturing businesses. The Petaluma River was the third busiest waterway in California in the mid 1800's. In the late 19°i century, the United States Army Corps of Engineers simplified the twists and turns of the river channel along the stretch from downtown to San Pablo Bay in order to improve access to the City. In the 1870s the railroad line and depot were constructed on the east bank of the river. Although the railroad opened up the east side of the City, the east side remained undeveloped as it was primarily owned by the ' rail companies and suffered from flooding problems. Overall, the flooding problems throughout the City caused the earliest residential areas to develop on the hill overlooking the downtown, leaving the downtown to business and light industrial uses. The introduction of the railroad increased Petaluma's role in the region. Agriculture, primarily dairy and chicken farming, dominated the economic landscape of the City. Large scale chicken farming arrived with the invention of a reliable incubator in 1879, and in 1918 the City was proclaimed the "egg basket of the world" by the U.S. Secretary of Commerce. Eventually, poultry farming began to decline, and chicken farms were converted into large lot residential areas. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-17 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 c.3 Petaluma Becomes Bedroom Community Petaluma's population grew at a steady rate during the early twentieth century, from 6,000 inhabitants in 1914 to around 11,300 in 1953. Along with economic and population growdt, suburbanization grew following WWII, due in part to the construction of the Golden Gate Bridge in 1936 and Highway 101 in the 1950s. Petaluma developed into a bedroom community for the Bay Area in the second half of the twentieth century. The highway provided improved access to the east side of the City, which had easily accessible and developable land. This drove development to the east, and the highway replaced the river as the primary corridor within the community. C. Central Business District Project Area (Original and Added Areas) The CBD Redevelopment Plan was adopted on September 27, 1976 and area was added on June 18, 2001 xi The Project Area consists of approximately 225 acres (98 acres in [he 1976 Original Area and 127 acres in the 2001 Added Area). The 1976 Original Area encompasses the majority of the historic downtown core of the City from D Street to Washington Street and from Lakeville Street to Liberty and 5h Streets. The 2001 Added Area consists of commercial, industrial and residential land uses located to the west and east of the 1976 Original Area. The western portion of the 2001 Added Area is generally bounded by Union Street, Western Avenue, Howard Street and Liberty Street, and the eastern portion is generally bounded by D Street, McNear Avenue, the Northwest Pacific Railroad, and Petaluma Boulevard. The 2001 Added Area does not include the McNear Peninsula or McNear Channel. Unless noted otherwise, the CBD refers to both the 1976 Original Area and the 2001 Added Area. Evidence Provided in Support of a Blight Finding at Time of Plan Adoption and Amendment The City Council found evidence of blight in the CBD and concluded that redevelopment was necessary to effectuate the public purposes declared in the CRL at the time of initial adoption of the Redevelopment Plan in 1976 and the time of adoption of the 2001 amendment. a. Blight Findings at the time of Plan Adoption for the 1976 Original Area The blight findings at the time of Plan Adoption in 1976 included the following: • The existence of buildings and structures used or intended to be used for living, commercial, industrial or other purposes, which are unfit or unsafe to occupy for such purpose due to age, obsolescence, deterioration and dilapidation; The existence of inadequate streets, open spaces and utilities; • In some part of the Project Area, a growing lack of proper utilization of areas, resulting in a stagnant and unproductive condition of land potentially useful and valuable for contributing to the public health, safety and welfare; 21 The Redevelopment Plan was also amended on November 21, 1994 and July 21, 1999 but these amendments did not add area. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-18 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 In other parts of the Project Area, a reduction of proper utilization of the area, resulting in further deterioration; The decline of the central business district as a viable and competitive retail commercial center; The lack of adequate off-street parking and poor traffic circulation in the project area; The lack of a safe and aesthetically pleasing pedestrian environment in the downtown area; and • Underutilization of the Petaluma River as a recreation and transportation resource. b. Blight Findings at the time of Plan Amendment for the 1976 Original and 2001 Added Areas The blight findings at the time of Plan Amendment in 2001 included the following: Non -retrofitted unreinforced masonry buildings that could prove to be unsafe and hazardous in the event of a major earthquake, and that could be uneconomic to rehabilitate at current market rents; Deteriorated and, in a few cases, dilapidated and/or abandoned commercial buildings; • Large underutilized properties that are blighted by abandoned railroad spur tracks; • Substandard, unpaved, or badly deteriorated pavement surfaces; • Streets with missing, heaved, deteriorated, subsided, or substandard curbs and gutters; • Areas without adequate storm drains; Obsolete commercial buildings (including imposing bank structures and retail structures of irregular configuration) that cannot economically accommodate modem retail uses; Vacant and possibly abandoned railroad and industrial buildings; Large parcels of vacant and underutilized land; • Adverse soils conditions that increase the cost of new construction and rehabilitation; and • Potential soils and groundwater contamination from commercial and industrial uses and informal and/or illegal dumping. 2. Redevelopment Activities and Development from Plan Adoption to Present The PCDC has undertaken many redevelopment projects and activities in the CBD since the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan in 1976. Even though these efforts have stimulated private development, the CBD still suffers from blighting conditions as described below. a. PCDC's Redevelopment Projects and Activities in the CBD The PCDC has undertaken public infrastructure, parking and public facility improvements, economic development, building rehabilitation and affordable housing activities in the CBD since the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan. These include parking garage capital improvements to the Keller Street parking structure; pavement and streetscape improvements; infrastructure improvements particularly for the Theater District Project; river enhancement improvements including the undergrounding of utilities and river access improvements; Petaluma Railroad restoration improvements; circulation accessibility improvements; seismic improvements to unreinforced masonry buildings; business retention and enhancement programs; street tree planting; affordable housing development; and rehabilitation of affordable housing. Refer to Table II -I for a summary of the PCDC's projects and activities in the CBD. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-19 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table 11-1 Completed and Ongoing Redevelopment Projects and Activities in the CBD Project 1129 Petaluma Blvd. & Land Acquisition A Street Parking Lot (American Alley Paving IBalshaw Bridge Bicycle Plan and Implementation CPSP Theater District Improvements Downtown Parking Garage Construction (Keller Street Parking Garage) Downtown Reslrooms I Downtown Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Renewal IRiver Walk Improvements and Putnam Plaza Golden Concourse Riverfront Enhancement Plan and Implementation Turning Basin Dredging and Docks Water Street Improvements Weller Street Improvements IBassett St. Renovation (Business Property Owner Assistance ICentral Petaluma Specific Plan & Implementation ID Street Underground Utilities (Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Improvements Implementation of Central Petaluma Specific Plan (Main Street Imprrovements Along Major Downtown Streets INortb Copeland/Baylis St. Improvements IPelaluma Railroad Depot Improvements IPelaluma River Trestle Engineering IPoultry Street Extension Storefront Improvement Loan Program Street Tree Planting & Establishment (Underground Tank Monitoring IURM Seismic Retrofit Program IWashington/Copeland Roundabout Design Source: Petaluma Community Development Commission Petaluma Community Development Commission II -20 Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Complete In Progress ■ ■ ■ ■ I ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ I ■ I ■ ■I ■I ■I ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Preliminary Report April 2006 Remaining Blighting Conditions in the CBD Recent field surveys and existing conditions analyses determined that blighting conditions persist in several areas of the CBD. These conditions include dilapidated or deteriorated buildings, earthquake hazards, hazardous material contamination, incompatible uses, substandard lots in multiple ownership, vacant and underutilized buildings and lots, and public infrastructure deficiencies. The blighting conditions in the CBD listed below are grouped by the current CRL definitions of blight, and cross referenced to prior definitions. a. Physical Blighting Conditions a.l Deficient or Deteriorated Buildings j33031(a)(1)I" The CBD is hindered by a substantial number of buildings that are unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. The deficient and deteriorated building analysis included field reconnaissance surveys and photographic documentation, age of building analysis, fire hazard analysis, review of umeinforced masonry buildings, and review of the 2001 building conditions survey, all of which are described below. Conditions observed during field reconnaissance surveys by Seifel Consulting include the following: • Unreinforced masonry buildings and partially reinforced masonry buildings (brick and hollow tile) that could prove to be unsafe and hazardous in the event of a major earthquake. • Commercial and residential buildings with apparent structural problems including cracked walls, sagging walls, sagging roof lines and settlement. • Dilapidated or extensively deteriorated commercial and residential buildings with deferred maintenance including chipped and peeling paint, deteriorated roofing and siding, damaged windows and doors, missing gutters and downspouts and deteriorated external piping. Aging, obsolete, damaged, and deteriorated corrugated metal warehouse and mill buildings. • Older residential and commercial structures that, because of their age and construction type, could also prove to be unsafe and hazardous in the event of a major earthquake. Buildings on land that, because of adverse soils conditions, could be subject to amplified shaking, liquefaction, or greater damage during a serious earthquake. Appendix B presents extensive photographic documentation of the adverse building conditions observed during the field reconnaissance surveys. Over 50 photographs of deteriorated building conditions in the CBD are presented, clearly documenting the unsafe and unhealthy building conditions described above including deteriorated structures, paint, roofing and walls; mold; structural alignment problems; broken windows; and unsafe wiring. Specific photographs that document the deteriorated building conditions in the CBD are shown in photographs 1-5, 7-10, 11, 13, 16, 17, 19, 21, 23-26, 28-37, 39-44, 47-49, 51, 52, 56-61, 63, and 67 in Appendix B. 22 The 1976 blighting condition that corresponds to deficient and deteriorated buildings is defective design and character of physical construction (CRL Section 33031(a)), and age, obsolescence, deterioration, dilapidation, mixed character or shifting of uses (CRL Section 33031(e)). Petaluma Community Development Commission I1-21 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 At=_e of Buildines Building age reflects design and construction practices, and can be a contributing factor to a building's safety for occupation and use. Building age also reflects changes in regulation and health standards that have evolved throughout the years. Older buildings require renovation and modernization in order to keep up with the evolving standards for a healthy and safe environment. In addition, older buildings must undergo regular maintenance to combat the effects of normal deterioration that occurs over the life of the building. The CBD is primarily made up of older buildings. These older buildings consist of many historical properties, which include several large Victorian structures such as the I.O.O.F lodge, the Masonic Hall, the McNear Building, the Mutual Relief Association Building, and the Petaluma Opera house. These buildings, which were constructed in the late 19th Century, have finely detailed facades and cast iron columns, and some have been restored and seismically retrofitted. However, the majority of the buildings in the historic downtown area of the CBD are of brick construction, and were designed for, and are currently used for, retail commercial purposes. Many of these buildings have problems typical of aging buildings such as deteriorated roofing and paint, and cracked and unreinforced masonry. These deteriorated building conditions are documented in the Appendix B, specifically photographs 30, 31, 35-37, 39, 40, 44, 4649, 51, 52 and 60-61. The age of building analysis for the CBD was performed using County Assessor data. The County Assessor data provided building age data for 267 of the 354 total buildings' in the CBD. Of the 267 buildings with building age data, over 36 percent were built prior to 1930. Furthermore, over 56 percent of the buildings were built prior to the 1955 Uniform Building Code. Structures built prior to the adoption of the 1955 Uniform Building Code are more susceptible to earthquake damage, unless adequately retrofitted. Conditions commonly found in such buildings include inadequate foundations and foundation connections, informal and substandard construction, weak cripple walls, dry rot or termite damage or poor design. In addition, buildings constructed prior to 1970 would not meet current design provisions for earthquake forces, and thus, an additional 14 percent of buildings may be at risk during an earthquake. In total, almost 70 percent of the buildings in the CBD are likely to be unsafe in the event of a significant earthquake, given their age and condition, as shown in Graph 11-1. As previously discussed, field surveys of the area indicate that a significant number of older buildings are deteriorated, dilapidated, and in some cases, abandoned, indicating that buildings have not undergone modernization or been maintained to levels that adhere to current health and safety standards. Many of these buildings have conditions that make them unsafe or unhealthy as places to live or work. 23 The total number of buildings in the Assessor Database (354) differs from the total number of buildings found in the 2001 Building Conditions Survey (439) performed by Seifel Consulting, Inc. This inconsistency is due to the changing landscape of the CSD over the last 4 years and the Assessor Database, which is based on the number of parcels, whereas the 2001 Building Survey was based on the number of buildings. Thus, the Assessor data may not account for multiple structures on a single parcel. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-22 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 In Ni 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 s2ul I!UU jo g C m m N b Unreinforced Masonry Buildings As discussed in Section B.La, unreinforced masonry buildings (URMs) and buildings constructed in the early to mid -1900s would be expected to incur the greatest structural damage during an earthquake. URMs are typically constructed of brick, hollow tile, or concrete block, and have proven to be particularly hazardous during an earthquake. As of July, 2005 the City has identified 44 URMs in the City, of which 34 are located in the CBD. Of the URMs located in the CBD, 17 properties still have not been retrofitted. Therefore, 50 percent of the identified URMs in the CBD are not adequately retrofitted, and are likely unsafe in the event of a significant seismic event. However, building that have been retrofitted can still be hazardous during an earthquake. See Figure H-6 in Section B.La for the location of URM's in the CBD. Fire Hazards and Damage The historic buildings in the CBD are particularly susceptible to fire danger and damage due to building age, construction materials, density and lack of modern fire protection, combined with local climatic conditions. The precipitation, humidity, temperature and winds affect the acceleration intensity and size of a fire in the downtown. Times of little of no rainfall, or low humidity and high temperature create extremely hazardous conditions, particularly affecting buildings with wood shake and wood shingle roofs that are prevalent in the CBD. The winds experienced in the CBD can also have a tremendous impact upon structure fires in the buildings in close proximity to one another. For example, winds cavy sparks and burning branches to other structures thus spreading the fire and causing conflagrations. Furthermore, winds can literally force fires back into the building and create a blowtorch effect. In the historic downtown district of the CBD, these conditions create particularly hazardous situations because of the densely situated buildings, many of which are large, old, wooden buildings without modern fire protection.''a According to Fire Chief Chris Albertson, the downtown has experienced 16 major fires since 1960. The most recent fire occurred in November 2002, which destroyed a building on Kentucky Street and severely injured one firefighter. In response to the large number of fires in the downtown, the City Council adopted an ordinance in November 2004 amending its Municipal Code to require the installation of automatic fire sprinklers in existing buildings in the historic building district of the CBD. The ordinance applies to all existing buildings within the following boundary: Kentucky Street to the west, Washington Street to the north, the Petaluma River to the east and B Street to the south.'' Properties along Kentucky Street and Western Avenue must install the fire sprinklers no later than December 31, 2010 (buildings with basements and below street grade areas) or December 31, 2016 (buildings without basements or below street grade areas). Installation of fire sprinklers in buildings along Petaluma Boulevard North are also required but cannot commence until the City constructs appropriately sized water main and laterals to the curb lines. (The existing water mains along Petaluma Boulevard do not have sufficient capacity at this time.) Once the water main improvements are completed along Petaluma Boulevard North, property owners will have six or twelve years, depending on building type, to install the sprinklers. (Refer to Section C.3.c for additional information on public improvement deficiencies within the CBD.) 2 4 Ordinance No. 2194 N.C.S., City of Petaluma, November 4, 2004. S rbid. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-24 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 2001 Building Survev A comprehensive building condition survey was performed in 2001 for the CBD Redevelopment Plan Amendment. However, as this amendment does not add territory and the CRL requires information to be prepared for an amendment only to the extent warranted by the proposed plan amendment, a building condition survey was not performed for this Preliminary Report. The 2001 building survey evaluated 187 buildings in the 1976 Original Arca. Of this total, 80 (43 percent) were found to be in generally good condition (category 3) to generally excellent condition (category 5). 107 buildings (or 57 percent) were found to be in the lower two rating categories, where extensive physical deficiencies are present. The average rating for the 1976 Original Area based on the 2001 building condition survey was 2.32 (which is between category 2: extensive physical/structural deficiencies and category 3: generally good condition with some deficiencies present). A total of 252 buildings were evaluated for the 2001 building conditions survey in the 2001 Added Area. Of this total, only 70 (or 28 percent) were found to be in generally good to generally excellent condition (category 3 through category 5). Most buildings (182 or 72 percent) were found to be in the lower two rating categories, where extensive physical deficiencies are present. The average rating for the 2001 Added Area based on the building condition survey was 2.09 (which is between category 2: extensive physical/structural deficiencies and category 3: generally good condition with some deficiencies present) .21 a.2 Factors that Inhibit Proper Use of Buildings or Lots 133031(a)(2)1' Factors that inhibit the proper use of buildings or lots in the CBD include hazardous materials contamination, obsolete buildings, flooding, earthquake hazards, lack of parking and impaired vehicular access, circulation and street conditions. These factors inhibit the proper use of the CBD because they result in a disincentive to redevelop and invest in these properties and surrounding properties, given the added costs and risks associated with the remediation of significant soil and groundwater contamination, and infrastructure improvements. The following sections describe how these factors adversely affect the CBD, as well as the public improvement deficiencies presented in Section C3.c. Hazardous Materials Contamination The remediation of toxic or hazardous waste is frequently costly and thus represents a major financial disincentive to reinvestment or development, inhibiting the proper use of buildings or lots. Often, in order for the development of a contaminated site to be feasible, public agency assistance is necessary. The fear of environmental liability, in particular, uncertainty over changing responsibility standards and costs, and the high price of conducting environmental investigations are some of the leading reasons deterring the beneficial development and use of urban sites. Developers fear that they will face liability under environmental laws and that the cost of evaluating and remediating contaminated sites is both so uncertain and so high that it could easily outweigh the market value of the property. 26 A total of 439 buildings were evaluated as part of the 2001 Building Condition Survey. This number does not match the total number of buildings identified in the age of building analysis. The inconsistency is due to the fact that the Assessor's Database Reports buildings by parcel, compared to the 2001 Building Survey that evaluated multiple buildings on parcels, if they were present. "The 1976 blighting condition that corresponds to factors that inhibit the proper use of buildings or lots is faulty interior arrangement and exterior spacing. (CRL Section 33031(b)) Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-25 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and other laws, developers may be held liable for past releases, even though they were not directly responsible for the conditions that gave rise to the liability. Therefore, prior to purchasing or entering into contract to develop a site, a developer must undertake extensive environmental investigations to determine whether hazardous materials are present. In addition, predicting the cost to conduct any potential remediation prior to development is imprecise, Finally, there are often delays associated with obtaining governmental approvals before development of contaminated or remediated sites may begin. Evidence of hazardous materials on properties results in a disincentive to redevelop and invest in properties, given added costs and risks. The redevelopment tool of the preparation of land for development would help ensure property redevelopment and the remediation of hazardous or toxic materials. in addition, if an area is within a redevelopment project area, under state law, the Agency could invoke the Polanco Act, which more readily shifts liability of environmental remediation to prior polluting property owners. Scife) Consulting reviewed existing environmental cases and spill sites in the CBD as reported by the Department of Toxic Substance Control (DTSC) and the State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB). DTSC oversees clean-up of hazardous sites throughout the state and SWRCB oversees the remcdation of water contamination and potential water contamination. Of the 13 DTSC sites within the City, one site, a former manufactured gas plant on the comer of I' and D Street, is located in the CBD. According to its DTSC Profile Report, the site is currently used as a PG&E electrical substation and both the groundwater and soil are contaminated with arsenic, lead and polynuclear hydrocarbons from its former use. The contamination exceeds the state action level and remediation is required. The SWRCB lists approximately 190 reported sites with Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFT) within the City of Petaluma, approximately 36 of which are in the CBD. The number of LUFTs within the CBD is significant considering its small size in relation to the City as a whole. Approximately 19 percent of the City's LUFTs are located in the CBD even though the Project Area represents only 3 percent of the City's total acreage, as shown in Table 11-2. Furthermore, 16 LUFTs per 100 acres are present in the CBD, compared to 2 LUFTs per 100 acres Citywide, which is also shown on Table H-2. Table II -3 lists the LUFTs in the CBD. Table II -2 LLTFT Sites within the CBD and Citywide LUFT Sites Acreage LUFT Sites Number ( Percentage Number Percentage Per I00 Acres CBD 36 19% 225 3% 16 City of Petaluma 190 100% 8,627 100% 2 Source: California State hater Resource Control Board, Geotracker, January 2005. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-26 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table II -3 Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFTs) in the CBD Site Name Street Number Street Name Etex, Inc. 419 1st St McNab, James & Alexander 401 1st St Metcalfs Auto Parts 494 2nd St Foundry Wharf Bus. Park 615 2nd St Barber Sign Company, Inc. 321 2nd St Bar Ale Inc. 225 2nd St Les's Truck & Auto Repair 301 2nd St Petaluma Recycling Center 315 2nd St U.S. Postal Service 120 4th St Petaluma School District 11 5th St Small's Scales 111 C St City of Petaluma Right of Way 111 C St Bar Ale Inc. 17 Copeland St Petaluma Fire Dept. HQ 198 D St Ramatici & Baker 102 D St D & M Automotive 210 F St Wells Fargo Trust Dept. 25 Kentucky St Hideaway 128 Kentucky St Pacific Bell 125 Liberty St Lace House Laundry/Linen 128 Liberty St Chevron #90152 2 Petaluma Blvd S Hansel Ford (former) 13 Petaluma Blvd S George's Auto Repair 400 Petaluma Blvd S Petaluma BP 421 Petaluma Blvd S Unocal #6152 201 Petaluma Blvd S Oliker Property 320 Petaluma Blvd S Rose Property 101 Petaluma Blvd S Auto World 115 Petaluma Blvd S Mahoney Davison Property 929 Petaluma Blvd S Andy's Auto Repair 619 Petaluma Blvd S Alliance 215 Washington St Unocal 300 Washington St Dairyman's Feed & Supply 323 Washington St E Unocal 96185 400 Washington St Shell Service Station 421 Washington St Ash Bag Comnanv 224 Weller St Source: California State Water Resource Control Board, Geotracker, January 2005. Petaluma Community Development Commission II -27 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 The California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) through the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Control Board regulates the Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Program (SLIC). Sites in the SLIC program are generally small to medium size industrial sites with non -fuel contamination. Of the 20 sites listed within the City, 3 are within the CBD. Refer to Table 1I-4 for a list of SLICs in the CBD. Again, the number of SLICs in the CBD is considerable given the Project Area's small size. Fifteen percent of the SLICs in the City are located in the CBD, even though the Project Area is only 3 percent of the City's total acreage. Figure 11-8 shows the location of the LUFTs and SLICs in the CBD. Table II -4 Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanups (SLIC) Sites in the CBD Owner Name Address Town Center Theater Site 15 & 19 Petaluma Blvd S Basin Street Properties 2nd Street and C St PG&E - MGP - Petaluma Comer of 1 st and D St Source: California State Water Resource Control Board, Geotracker, January 2005. Obsolete Buildines The presence of obsolete buildings inhibits the proper use of these properties as well as neighboring properties and discourages investment in the area. Many of the buildings in the CBD were built shortly after the turn of the 20'h Century to serve a burgeoning agricultural economy that no longer exists. These buildings include rail and river -oriented warehouses and mills of wood and corrugated metal construction that are unable to meet modem warehousing or industrial requirements. Most lack the loading dock and paved yard space necessary to accommodate modem trucking operations or other warehousing or distribution uses. Obsolete buildings present in the CBD include the following: • Many existing commercial buildings have been built on long, narrow lots and, as a result, have a physical configuration that is inappropriate for modem retailing purposes. • A large number of the buildings in the CBD are of umeinforced masonry construction. Although many have been retrofitted and rehabilitated, the cost of retrofitting and rehabilitating others to a safe standard may be economically infeasible given the current market rents. • There are several special purpose buildings (such as grain warehouses or old, obsolete automobile dealerships) that are no longer suitable or desirable for commercial use. These conditions are illustrated in photographs 31, 35-37, 39, 40, 46, 47, and 49 located in Appendix B. Earthquake Hazards Earthquake hazards affect the entire CBD. These include proximity to dangerous earthquake faults, buildings that are susceptible to damage during an earthquake, and soils conditions that amplify seismic shaking. These conditions add greatly to the cost of building rehabilitation and new construction. For more detail, refer to section B. La. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-28 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Flooding As described in the section B.l .b, a substantial part of the CBD is subject to flooding during periods of heavy rainfall and high tides on the Petaluma River. Development within areas subject to periodic flooding requires that the first floor be built at least one foot above the 100 -year flood level. In the areas described above, one to five feet of earth fill may be needed to meet this requirement. As a result such development is often much more costly than development in areas without flooding problems. And, since adjoining streets are typically not elevated, properties fronting on these streets may have limited access during periods of flooding. Adverse Soils Conditions As has been previously described in section B.l.a, a large part of the CBD has adverse soil conditions, including areas of Bay mud. Not only do these conditions add significantly to earthquake hazards, but they also may add substantially to the cost of new construction. In fact, in areas characterized by the presence of Bay mud, costly pilings would be required to provide support and stability for anything but the smallest buildings. Vehicular Access Circulation and Street Conditions Many of the existing streets within the CBD are in poor condition, with below -standard pavement, curbs and gutters. The overall street grid is incomplete and fragmented, with many dead end streets near the river's edge. The river and the railroad are predominant features of the CBD, and they act as parallel barriers to vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle circulation. An inactive rail spur along Water Street to the south of the Petaluma River further adds to circulation impediments. Southeast of D Street there are no crossings of the river or the railroad, and any future crossing construction would involve complex coordination to maintain river and rail use.28 These conditions cause inadequate access to individual parcels within certain areas. These parcels include properties along the river to the north of D Street, industrial uses along the McNear Channel, and properties along Lakeville Street that have access limitations imposed by the railroad and the lack of improved streets. Additionally, the CBD does not have well-developed pedestrian and bicycle networks and much of the area is not pedestrian or bicycle friendly. Further, the CBD suffers from significant street deficiencies including deteriorated pavement, lack of sidewalks and curbs and abandoned and deteriorated railroad tracks that exacerbates the poor vehicular access and circulation in the CBD. Field reconnaissance surveys found many streets with poor pavement conditions and missing sidewalks and curbs, particularly I't, H, E, Baylis, Water and East D Streets. Deteriorated and abandoned railroad tracks traverse Water and 1" Streets, resulting in potential safety hazards for vehicular traffic. 28 Central Petaluma Specific Plan, City of Petaluma, June 2003.p.60. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1I-30 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Poor vehicular access circulation and street deficiencies negatively impact the amount of traffic and accidents in the CBD. Level of Service (LOS) was analyzed for Petaluma's roadways and intersections in 2001, as part of the Petaluma General Plan Existing Conditions Report. The LOS grading system ranges from A (free flow with little or no delay) to F (forced flow with long queues and delays). Nine intersections in the City were determined to operate at LOS of "D" or worse. Three of these intersections are in the CBD.'-' These intersections are: Lakeville Highway/D Street • Petaluma Boulevard/Washington Street Petaluma Boulevard/D Street Collision data from 1996 to 2000 indicates that four streets with the greatest number of collisions during that period are within the CBD. Three of the seven intersections with the greatest number of collisions are in the CBD. (See additional description in Section c. I.) Lack of Parking A lack of parking in the CBD is a potential hindrance to the attraction of new development and higher lease rates in the area. According to the 2003 Central Petaluma Specific Plan, development of parking is necessary in order to create the intense pedestrian oriented district that is envisioned for the downtown area. Although some measures have been taken to correct the parking deficiency, inadequate parking still affects areas in the downtown. According to a broker interviewed about market conditions in Project Areas, office buildings located on the river side with only street parking are particularly affected by a lack of parking, and as a result, rents have been lower than other buildings in the downtown. Additionally, the broker acknowledged that downtown retailers may also be negatively affected by the lack of adequate packing facilities. a.3 Incompatible Uses [33031(a)(3)130 Some land uses in the CBD are incompatible with one another and contribute to adverse conditions in the CBD. Residences are located adjacent to industrial uses in several sections of the CBD. As shown in Figure II -9, this occurs particularly in the southern portion of the Project Area. In addition, new development within the Central Petaluma Specific Plan boundaries may cause further compatibility challenges due to the established heavy industry in the area, as identified in the 2002 Petaluma General Plan Existing Conditions Report" a.4 Substandard Lots in Multiple Ownership [33031(a)(4)132 The CBD has a wide variety of lots of differing sizes and configurations in fragmented ownership, as shown in Figure II -9. In some areas along Petaluma Boulevard, lots tend to be small and shallow, a condition that inhibits economic reuse and redevelopment. Lots north of the Petaluma River are irregularly shaped due to the configuration of the river. The size and configuration of these substandard lots contribute to the adverse physical conditions that are evident in this area. "Petaluma General Plan 2025: Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Challenges Report, Dyett & Bbatia, October 2002, p. 7-12. 70 The 1976 blighting condition that corresponds to incompatible uses is age, obsolescence, deterioration, dilapidation, mixed character or shifting of uses (CRL Section 3303 Ile)), and an economic dislocation, deterioration or disuse resulting from faulty planning (CRL Section 33032(a)). 31 Petaluma General Plan 2025 Existing Conditions, Opportunities, and Challenges Report, October 10, 2002, p. 4-13. 32 The 1976 blighting condition that corresponds to substandard lots in multiple ownership is the subdividing and sale of lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development. (CRL Section 33032(b)) Petaluma Community Development Commission 1I-31 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 J C v h ^J U CD N U L� E4 4 0. b. Economic Blighting Conditions b.1 Depreciated Values or Impaired Investments 133031(6)(1)1" This section documents the presence of blighting conditions described in CRL Section 33031(b)(1) in the CBD, including the presence of potentially hazardous or toxic waste and a high cost of building rehabilitation. Hazardous Materials As discussed in Section C.3.a, hazardous materials and toxic contamination are present within the CBD. The contamination, the unknown cost to redevelop parcels, and the safety concerns while remediating the parcels impair the value of the 36 properties with LUFTs and 3 SLIC sites in the CBD. High Cost of Building Rehabilitation The following analysis demonstrates that private financing techniques alone will not likely be sufficient to undertake substantial rehabilitation of typical buildings in the downtown. It evaluates impaired investment in terms of a private investor's ability to rehabilitate a deteriorated, older building while achieving a reasonable return on investment. The analysis demonstrates that it is not financially feasible for the private sector acting alone to purchase at market value and rehabilitate deteriorated buildings in the CBD without outside financial assistance. Proto"ical Rehabilitation Proiect A prototypical purchase and rehabilitation project in CBD would require a subsidy of about $1.9 million to be financially feasible for a typical developer. The ability of private developers to invest in rehabilitation of substandard buildings is a measure of economic health within the project area. When new rehabilitation is not feasible, needed building capital improvements are deferred and properties are not upgraded and are poorly maintained. Under these circumstances, the properties remain blighted. The primary constraints to rehabilitation are the age and poor condition of buildings in [he area, the need to seismically retrofit a number of buildings in this area, and the high cost of construction. The analysis concludes that redevelopment assistance is necessary for an effective rehabilitation program to alleviate the identified physical blighting conditions. The costs of preserving and upgrading historic and other older buildings is difficult to determine but are likely to be substantial in many cases. The costs associated with the rehabilitation of historic and older buildings could involve some or all of the following: Historic preservation including facade preservation, Seismic upgrading, • Asbestos removal, Cleanup of contaminated sites such as the removal of underground fuel tanks, and • Interior remodeling for adaptive reuse. The following analysis demonstrates a substantial gap between the potential rehabilitation costs and the availability of private and public (non -redevelopment) sources to finance such projects. 33 The 1976 blighting condition that corresponds to depreciated values or impaired investments is a prevalence of depreciated values, impaired investments and social and economic maladjustment. (CRL Section 33032(d)) Petaluma Community Development Commission 1I-33 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 This analysis examines the feasibility of rehabilitating a prototypical mixed use project in the CBD. The rehabilitation assumes extensive improvements as indicated above, which is likely in many older CBD buildings. The assumptions for this analysis were obtained from discussions with Agency staff, comparable sales information, and discussions with local real estate brokers. This approach starts with an estimated project cost for the purchase and rehabilitation of an older building in poor condition based on comparable sales in the CBD and the cost of undertaking substantial rehabilitation. This project cost is then compared with the loan and equity amounts that could be supported by projected rents generated by the completed project. This prototype is used for illustrative purposes to demonstrate the impact of rental rates and property values on the economic value of the investment. The prototypical project is a 15,000 square foot, historic mixed-use building with about 5,000 square feet of commercial space on the ground floor and 10,000 square feet of office space on the upper floors. The project involves seismic upgrading, facade restoration to meet historic standards, asbestos removal, and interior remodeling. Table H-5 summarizes the estimated costs and the projected revenues of this prototypical rehabilitation project. The site acquisition cost would be approximately $2,250,000, assuming a cost of about $150 per square foot, per current building sales prices data. Rehabilitation construction costs would be about $1.4 million, at approximately $120 per square foot. The total cost of the project, including soft costs and contingency costs, would be about $4.6 million. A typical commercial building of this size is projected to generate a gross income of $327,000 annually given current market conditions, assuming full service office rents at $1.90 per square foot and ground floor retail rents at $1.65 NNN per square foot. Subtracting an eight percent vacancy loss and operating expenses yields a net operating income of approximately $247,000 per year, before tax. Lending institutions typically require that net operating income exceeds debt service payment by 15 to 20 percent for mixed-use projects (a debt coverage ratio of at least 1.15 to 1.2). The 1.2 debt coverage ratio yields about $206,000 available to cover debt service and an annual cash flow of about $41,000 (used to provide the return to equity investors). The annual debt service amount could support a mortgage loan of about $2.3 million. The annual cash flow would support about $343,000 in equity investment yielding a 12 percent interest rate. Thus, the total amount that developers could reasonably expect to raise from private sources is about $2.6 million, resulting in a financing gap of nearly $2 million. The private sector does not have sufficient financial incentive to undertake a rehabilitation project in the CBD. A prototypical purchase and rehabilitation project in the Project Area would require a large subsidy to be financially feasible for a typical developer. Without financial assistance to help underwrite rehabilitation costs, the private sector would not undertake purchase and rehabilitation projects in the CBD. With financial investment by the Agency, however, the risk to the private sector is reduced, and a positive incentive for new development is created. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-34 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table II -5 Prototypical Purchase & Rehabilitation Project Retail and Office Use Estimated Proiect Costs Site Acquisition Cost $2,250,000 Rehabilitation Cost $1,800,000 Soft Costs @ 20% $360,000 Contingency @ 10% $180,000 Total Development Cost $4,590,000 Estimated Income & Exn_ enses_ 12.0% Rental Income $342.833 Retail $99,000 Office $228.000 Gross Possible Income $327,000 Vacancy Loss 8% Total Vacancy Loss $26,160 Operating Expenses 554.000 Net Operating Income (NOI) $246,840 Maximum Suouortable Loan 15,000 Debt Coverage Ratio 1.20 NOI Available for Debt $205,700 Maximum Loan $2,292,927 Annual Cash Flow $41,140 Return on Equity 12.0% Supportable Value of Equity $342.833 Total Available for Project $2,635,760 Proiected Financine Gan Total Available for Project $2,635,760 Less Actual Development Cost $4,590,000 Financing Gap ($1,954,240) Assumptions: Income & Expenses Building Square Feet 15,000 Retail SF 5,000 Office SF 10,000 Rental Income per SF (Retail) $1.65 Rental Income per SF (Office) $1.90 Operating Expenses per SF $0.30 Loan Terms Mortgage Interest Rate 7.5% Term (years) 25 Estimated Project Costs Site Acquisition Cost per SF $150 Rehabilitation Hard Cost per SF $120 Soft Cost % of Hard Cost 20% Contingency % of Hard Cost 10% Source: Seifel Consulting Inc., Broker Surveys Conducted June and July 2005. Petaluma Community Development Commission E-35 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 b.2 Economic Indicators of Distressed Buildings or Lots [33031(b)(2)1'a This section documents the presence of the blighting condition economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots, as described in CRL Section 33031(b)(2) in the CBD, including vacant and underutilized lots and buildings. Vacant and Underutilized Lots Many unimproved and improved parcels that include vacant parcels and parcels used for parking or vehicle storage are currently underutilized. The 2002 Petaluma Existing Conditions report identifies vacant and underutilized land near the Tuning Basin, between Lakeville Street and the Petaluma River and in the warehouse district]" Other parcels with these conditions are documented in photographs 20, 22, 27, 45, 46, 68, and 71 located in Appendix B. The locations of vacant and underutilized parcels in the CBD are indicated in Figure 11-10. Vacant and Underutilized Buildings The presence of vacant and underutilized buildings represent a lack of demand for space in a particular area. The lack of demand can occur for a number of reasons including the age and condition of buildings, the compatibility of the buildings to different uses, or conditions in the economy or overall market. The City, particularly the CBD, has suffered from high vacancy rates in the office sector. Seifel Consulting performed a survey of knowledgeable brokers in the area between June and July 2005. According to data gathered from these brokers, the City's office vacancy rates for existing space are between 18 and 21 percent. When the sublease market is included the vacancy rate jumps to 27 percent. According to brokers contacted for the survey, many of these vacancies are located in and around the Basin Street area, which is included in the Project Area. These vacancy rates are extremely high compared to Santa Rosa, which has an office vacancy rate of between 9 and 15 percent. Potential causes for the high vacancy rates include the age and condition of buildings, the compatibility of the buildings to different uses, or conditions in the economy or overall market. However, the lower relative vacancy rates in the surrounding communities suggest that the issues are most likely building and area specific, rather than wide spread economic or market conditions. Examples of vacant and underutilized buildings in the CBD are shown in photographs 2, 6, 21, 50, 62, 64, 65, 66, 69 and 70 in Appendix B. 34 The 1976 blighting condition that corresponds to economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots is a prevalence of depreciated values, impaired investments and social and economic maladjustment. (CRL Section 33032(d)) 35 Petaluma General Plan 2025 Existing Conditions, Opportunities, and Challenges Report, October 10, 2002, p. 4-13. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-36 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 WA r. C. Public Improvement Deficiencies [33030(c)136 Prior to 1994, inadequate public improvements was a factor of blight under the CRL, and the PCDC made findings that the CBD 1976 Original Area exhibited this blighting condition. This blighting condition continues to exist in the CBD 1976 Original Area and is described as a blighting condition. Under current blight definitions in the CRL, the presence of inadequate public improvements cannot be the sole reason for redevelopment. However, as shown above, CRL Section 33030(c) permits consideration of inadequate public improvements when blighting conditions exist in a project area. Inadequate public improvements may be a contributing factor to blight, and an agency may undertake needed public improvements to alleviate blight. This applies to the CBD 2001 Added Area. To the extent they are present, inadequate public improvements typically reflect problems that exaggerate the effects of blight. The public improvement deficiencies still remaining in the CBD include the following: • Poor vehicular access, circulation deficiencies and street conditions • Water system deficiencies • Condition, capacity and operational issues with the sewer system • Storm drainage system insufficiencies Joint trench utilities deficiencies A portion of the CBD supports industrial uses that have not changed significantly in the past 100 years, and the public improvement systems serving the area have not been modernized to meet current market needs or to account for natural obsolescence. Many of the utility systems require significant upgrading as the area continues to redevelop from a predominantly industrial character into a mixed-use development with urban densities. The public improvement deficiencies exhibited in the CBD are discussed in detail below. CA Poor Vehicular Access, Circulation Deficiencies and Street Conditions As discussed previously in Section C.3.a.2, the overall street grid in the CBD is incomplete and fragmented, with many dead end streets near the river's edge. The river and the railroad are predominant features of the CBD, and they act as parallel barriers to vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle circulation. Southeast of D Street there are no crossings of the river or the railroad, and any future crossing construction would involve complex coordination to maintain river and rail use." Poor vehicle access and circulation impacts the amount of traffic and accidents in CBD. Additionally, although some routes are improved, the CBD does not have well-developed pedestrian and bicycle networks, and much of the area is not pedestrian or bicycle friendly. 36 The 1976 blighting conditions that correspond to public improvement deficiencies is the inadequate provision for ventilation, light, sanitation, open spaces and recreation facilities (CRL Section 33032(x)), and the existence of inadequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces, and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or governmental action without redevelopment (CRL Section 33032(d)). 37 Central Petaluma Specific Plan, City of Petaluma, June 2003. p. 60. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-38 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Further, the CBD suffers from significant street deficiencies including deteriorated pavement, lack of sidewalks and curbs and abandoned and deteriorated railroad tracks that negatively impact vehicular access and circulation in the CBD. Field reconnaissance surveys found many streets with poor pavement conditions and missing sidewalks and curbs, particularly 2nd, E, F, G, H, Baylis, and Petaluma Boulevard South Streets. As previously identified in Section C.3.a.2, three intersections in the CBD operate at a Level of Service rating of "D" or worse (a rating of "A" indicates free flow with little or no delay and "F" indicates forced flow with long queues and delays.)." Furthermore, four of five streets (Petaluma Boulevard, Washington Street, Lakeville Highway and D Street) and three of the seven intersections in the City with the greatest number of collisions in the City are located in the CBD.' The intersections are: Lakeville Highway/D Street East Washington Street/Lakeville Highway Washington Street/Petaluma Boulevard/ e.2 Water System According to the 2003 Central Petaluma Specific Plan, aging pipes of inadequate size and outdated materials and the lack of a loop connection make the water service and fire protection systems within the area inadequate to serve existing and new development. The Washington Street main water line feeds a series of distribution lines that consist of cast iron, ductile iron, welded steel, asbestos concrete, and polyvinyl chloride pipes, many of which date back to the 19'h century. Many of the present distribution pipes are the oldest in the City and were installed incrementally without the benefit of a master plan. Furthermore, according to Dean Eckerson, Engineering Manager for the City's Department of Water Resources and Conservation, the Oak Hill Reservoir currently serving the CBD is approximately 100 years old and has reached the end of its service life. Operational maintenance issues currently exist due to its age and deteriorated condition, and replacement is necessary for long term reliability." The water system deficiencies also impact the City's ability to reduce potential fire danger and damage in the CBD. According to the Central Petaluma Specific Plan, only a few loop connections exist among pipes vital to the provision of fire flows in the CBD. As previously discussed in section C.3.a, fires present a significant threat for the historic buildings in the CBD. The City recently passed an ordinance requiring the installation of automatic fire sprinklers in pre-existing buildings in the historical area of the CBD. According to Eckerson, however, the water mains and laterals in the historic downtown are currently not sufficient for fire sprinklers to be installed in all of the historic buildings. New water mains along Petaluma Boulevard must first be installed before fire sprinklers can be installed in buildings along this street. 3" Petaluma General Plan 2025: Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Challenges Report, Dyett & Bhatia, October 2002, p. 7-12. 39 Aid., p. 7-28 through 7-31. ao Interview with Dean Eckerson, Engineering Manager, City of Petaluma Department of Water Resources and Conservation Department, March 29, 2005. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-39 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 c.3 Sewer System The CBD is composed of relatively flat terrain not conducive to a gravity flow sanitary sewer system. According to the 2003 Central Petaluma Specific Plan, soils within the CBD vary greatly, but none provide ideal conditions for sewer pipelines. The river itself acts as a topographic trough that splits the area into two sections. Soil conditions cause pipe abrasions and clogs; retain water, causing corrosion and infiltration of pipes; and create differential settlement, shifting and cracking pipes. Before 1938, the City had a combined storm drain and sewer system. When Petaluma constructed a separate system for wastewater treatment, remnants of the storm drain were incorporated for transporting sewage. Over the past 30 years, the City has improved the worst of these conditions; however, serious infiltration and inflow problems persist because of the degraded condition of many of the pipelines. Furthermore, according to Eckerson, numerous sewer mains in the CBD are in need of rehabilitation or replacement, and some of the sewer lines in service are over 100 years old. Specifically, the sewer pipes on 1st Street between F and H Streets are deteriorated and experience capacity issues. The adverse slopes along 1st Street negatively impact the operational capacity of the sewer line. Capacity and operational issues also are present along Washington and Howard Streets.' Additionally the existing C Street Pump Station requires additional capacity and operational reliability to support redevelopment in the CBD. c.4 Storm Drainage System Central Petaluma, particularly the CBD, contains a disjointed and sporadic series of storm drains, mostly dating back to the early part of the 20" century, according to the 2003 Central Petaluma Specific Plan. Because of the limited capacity of the existing storm drain, properties within Central Petaluma rely on street surfaces and sheet flow over adjacent lots for drainage. This drainage pattern often results in large areas of ponding and flooded streets during storms. Properties that adjoin the river often provide for sheet flows to the river or have privately installed and maintained drainage pipes discharging directly into the river. More specifically, two areas within the CBD have significant storm drainage deficiencies. According to Eckerson, the streets south of F Street are in need of storm drainage repairs, consisting of either a replacement of deteriorated pipes or new pipes altogether. The storm drains along H Street are also deficient as well East D at Copeland Street. The intersections are prone to flooding, particularly along the public rights of way. The street flooding along H Street due to storm drainage deficiencies is a potential safety issue."' - c.5 Joint Trench Utilities Currently throughout the CBD, joint trench utilities except natural gas are typically distributed to properties by overhead wires on poles. To improve public health and safety during storms and natural disasters and to promote the aesthetics of the streetscape, these utilities should be placed underground in a joint trench whenever existing streets are redeveloped, and new streets are developed." c.6 Photographic Documentation Refer to photographs 12, 15, 16, 18-20, 22, 23, 34, 41, and 72-75 in Appendix B for examples of public improvement deficiencies described above, including street flooding and ponding, deteriorated street pavement, lack of sidewalks and curbs and abandoned railroad tracks. 41 Ibid. 4'_ Ibid. 43 2003 Central Petaluma Specific Plan, p. 87. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-40 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 4. Conclusions for Remaining Blighting Conditions for the CBD The CBD still suffers from several physical and economic blighting conditions. The following statutorily defined conditions of blight are substantial and prevalent in the CBD: Deficient or deteriorated buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. Incompatible uses. Substandard lots in multiple ownership. Depreciated values and impaired investments. Economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots. Inadequate public improvements. The factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of building or lots in the CBD include obsolete buildings; the presence of underutilized buildings and lots; and substandard and vacant lots. These conditions contribute to the economic blighting conditions of high building vacancies and limited reinvestment in properties. The economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots in the CBD include underutilized and vacant buildings and lots, which contributes to general economic decline of the CBD. The analysis of blighting conditions in the CBD indicates that these conditions are so substantial and prevalent that they constitute physical and economic blight. Thus, redevelopment is necessary for the CBD to reach its full potential. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-41 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 D. Petaluma Community Development Project Area The PCD Redevelopment Plan was adopted in July 1988, and amended in 1994 and 2000. The PCD includes approximately 2,740 acres generally along both sides of U.S. Highway 101 from Old Redwood Highway to Washington Street, the Southwest side of U.S. Highway 101 from Washington Street to Lakeville Street, and both sides of U.S. Highway 101 from Lakeville Street to Petaluma Boulevard South and East of U.S. Highway 101 to the "Haystack Landing" area. The Project Arca also includes approximately live miles of the Petaluma River and Willow Brook Creek of which a majority parallels U.S. Highway 101. Portions of major traffic arteries including Petaluma Boulevard North and South, North McDowell, Old Redwood Highway, East Washington Street, Lakeville Street and Lakeville Highway are also situated in the PCD.' Also included in the PCD are several major business parks and industrial uses as well as five major retail centers: Washington Square, Petaluma Plaza North and South, the Petaluma Premium Factory Outlets, and the Petaluma Auto Plaza. The area includes many public and institutional uses. 1. Blight Findings at Time of Plan Adoption and Amendment a. Blight Findings at the Time of Plan Adoption in 1988 The Redevelopment Plan was adopted in 1988, prior to the 1994 changes to the CRL requirements for blighting conditions (AB 1290). The 1988 review of the Project Area found blighting conditions that met the requirements of redevelopment law in effect at the time of Plan adoption. The 1988 Report to Council highlights the following blighting conditions: • The subdividing and sale of lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development. The laying out of lots in disregard of the contours and other topography or physical characteristics of the ground and surrounding conditions. The existence of inadequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or governmental action without redevelopment. An economic dislocation, deterioration, or disuse resulting from faulty planning. A prevalence of depreciated values, impaired investments, and social and economic maladjustment. In addition the Assessment of Conditions Report prepared in June 1988 as background for the Plan Adoption included two additional conditions of blight: Mixed character of existing land use patterns. Deteriorated land and buildings. The 1988 EIR found that blighting conditions deterred growth in the PCD, led to underutilization, and hindered development. The configuration of the physical topography of the PCD significantly contributed to the blighting conditions. Inadequate flood control drainage channels imposed substantial development restrictions upon the PCD. 44 Petaluma Community Development Commission, Mid -Term Review Of The PCD Five -Year Implementation Plan (FY 2001-02 through FY 2006-07), April 19, 2004. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-42 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 b. Blighting Conditions in 2000 Many of the blighting conditions documented for the 1988 Plan Adoption were still present at the time of the Plan Amendment in 2000. The blight findings at the time of Plan Amendment in 2000 included the following: Flood control problems. Inadequate road, water and sewer facilities. • Deteriorating residential, industrial and commercial units. Lots of small size and irregular shape. Economic dislocations. Incompatible mixed land uses. Fragmented ownership patterns which make ordinary development in the Project Area without redevelopment economically unfeasible. 45 As discussed in the next section, most of these conditions persist today, despite PCDC efforts. 2. Redevelopment Activities and Development from Plan Adoption to Present a. PCDC's Redevelopment Projects and Activities in the PCD The PCDC has undertaken public infrastructure, public facility and economic development activities in the PCD since the adoption of, and amendment to, the Redevelopment Plan. These include traffic circulation and parking improvements; curbs, gutters, sidewalks, lighting and landscaping improvements; gateway entrances improvements; development assistance for a 194 -berth marina and the Petaluma Marina Hotel on the Petaluma River; the planting of street trees; the retail strategy implementation to the Industrial Avenue site; acquisition of land and public improvements for the Petaluma Auto Plaza; and the Petaluma Premium Factory Outlet Center. Refer to Table II -6 for a summary of PCDC projects and activities. as Final Environmental Impact Report for the Petaluma Community Development Project, PCDC, 1988, page 5. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-43 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table II -6 Completed and Ongoing Redevelopment Projects and Activities in the PCD Project Auto Plaza Project and Outlet Center Bassett Street Remodel Corona Reach Specific Plan & Implementation (Flood Control Improvements (Lakeville Highway Widening Project (Main St. Improvements/ Putnam Place Crossing �McDowell/E. Washington Widening No. McDowell/ Old Redwood Highway Land Use Study Old Redwood Hwv/Willowbrook Bridge Replacement Project Petaluma River Marina Improvements Real Property Purchase (27 Howard) Retail Leakage Study Brownfield EPA Assessment Project Canfield Extension Central Petaluma Specific Plan & Implementation Economic Development Promotion Program Gateway Capital Improvements Industrial Avenue Development Preparations Kenilworth/Washington St. Improvements Landscape Improvements Petaluma Boulevard North Improvements Petaluma Marina Hotel Assistance Ranier Crosstown Connection & Interchange Project Redwood Crossing Master Plan (River Enhancement Plan and Implementation Storefront Improvement Loan Program Street Tree Planting & Establishment Underground Tank Site Clean Up �URM Seismic Retrofit Program Utility Undergroundine Studies Source: Petaluma Community Development Commission Petaluma Community Development Commission IT -44 Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Complete In Proeressl ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ Preliminary Report April 2006 3. Remaining Blighting Conditions in the PCD The PCD has been improved by public and private actions since the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan in 1988 and the Plan Amendment in 2000. However, recent field surveys and existing conditions analyses determined that many of the blighting conditions originally described in the 1988 and 2000 Reports to Council still remain. These conditions include deficient buildings; incompatible uses; hazardous materials and contamination; lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development; economic dislocation, deterioration, or disuse resulting from faulty planning; depreciated values, impaired investments, and social and economic maladjustment; and inadequate public improvements, public facilities and open spaces. The PCD's remaining blighting conditions are grouped by the current CRL definitions of blight and cross referenced with footnotes to blighting conditions as defined by the CRL in 1988 at the time the Plan was adopted. a. Physical Blighting Conditions a.1 Deficient or Deteriorated Buildings 133031(x)(1)1" The PCD is hindered by a substantial number of deficient and deteriorated buildings, many of which are unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. Conditions observed during field reconnaissance surveys by Seifel Consulting include the following: • Commercial and residential buildings with apparent structural problems including cracked walls, sagging walls, sagging roof lines and settlement. • Dilapidated or extensively deteriorated commercial and residential buildings with deferred maintenance including chipped and peeling paint, deteriorated roofing and siding, damaged windows and doors, missing gutters and downspouts and deteriorated external piping. • Aging, obsolete, damaged, and deteriorated corrugated metal warehouse and mill buildings. • Aging, deteriorated, and in a few cases, dilapidated residential buildings. • Older residential and commercial structures that, because of their age and construction type, could also prove to be unsafe and hazardous in the event of a major earthquake. • Buildings on land that, because of adverse soils conditions, could be subject to amplified shaking, liquefaction, or greater damage during a serious earthquake. Appendix B presents extensive photographic documentation of the adverse building conditions observed during the field reconnaissance surveys. Over 65 photographs of deteriorated building conditions in the PCD are presented, clearly documenting conditions that create unsafe and unhealthy buildings discussed above such as deteriorated structures, paint, roofing and walls; deferred maintenance; structural alignment problems; broken windows; and unsafe wiring. Refer to the following photographs in Appendix B: 78-81, 90, 93-97, 99, 102-104, 107-110, 112-119, 121, 123, 124-129, 131-135, 137, 138, 140, 143-146, 154, 158, 159, 163-168, 170, 172, 174-178, 184-186 and 190. ab The 1988 blight finding included in the PCD Report to Council that corresponds to the blighting condition of deficient and deteriorated buildings is defective design and character of physical construction. (CRL Section 33031(a)) Petaluma Community Development Commission I1-45 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Ave of Buildines Building age reflects design and construction practices, and can be a contributing factor to a building's safety for occupation and use. Building age also reflects changes in regulation and health standards that have evolved throughout the years. Older buildings require renovation and modernization in order to keep up with the evolving standards for a healthy and safe environment. In addition, older buildings must undergo regular maintenance to combat the effects of normal deterioration that occurs over the life of the building. The PCD is made up of a large range of buildings, which vary in both age and use. Many of the older buildings in the PCD are wooden, farm buildings that are vulnerable to the effects of time if not properly maintained. Scifel Consulting used County Assessor data to analyze the age of buildings in the PCD. The County Assessor data provided age of building data for approximately 90 percent of the 1,965 buildings in the PCD. Of the buildings with age of building data, 145 buildings are over 75 years old, and over 500 buildings were built prior to 1955. Structures built prior to the adoption of the 1955 Uniform Building Code are more susceptible to earthquake damage, unless adequately retrofitted. Furthermore, over 58 percent of the buildings were constructed before 1970. Buildings constructed prior to 1970 would not meet current design provisions for earthquake forces. Therefore, over half of the buildings in the PCD are likely to be unsafe in the event of a significant earthquake, given their age and condition, unless adequately retrofitted. Graph fl -2 shows the breakdown of building by age in the PCD. In addition to seismic susceptibility, many of these buildings have problems that are typical of aging buildings such as deteriorated structures, deteriorated paint and cracked and unreinforced masonry. These deteriorated building conditions are documented in the Appendix B, specifically in photographs 79-81, 90, 94-97, 99, 103, 104, 107-110, 113, 117, 119, 123, 132-134, 137, 138, 140, 168, and 184-186. Unreinforced Masonry Buildines (URMs) As discussed in Section B.l.a, unreinforced masonry buildings and buildings constructed in the early to mid -1900s would be expected to incur the greatest structural damage during an earthquake. URMs are typically constructed of brick, hollow tile, or concrete block, and have proven to be particularly hazardous during an earthquake. As of July 2005, the PCD had 9 URMs. Out of these URMs, 4 have not been retrofitted. Therefore, approximately 50 percent of the identified URMs in the PCD are not adequately retrofitted, and are likely unsafe in the event of a significant seismic event. Further, as discussed in Section B. La compliance with City retrofit standards does not necessarily prevent loss of life or injury or prevent damage to rehabilitated buildings in the event of a major earthquake. Figure H-6 shows the location of URM's that have not been retrofitted in the PCD. a.2 Factors that Inhibit Proper Use of Buildings or Lots [33031(a)(2)1" Factors that inhibit the proper use of buildings or lots in the PCD include hazardous materials contamination, earthquake hazards, adverse soil conditions, flooding and obsolete buildings. These factors inhibit the proper use of the PCD because they result in a disincentive to redevelop and invest in these properties and surrounding properties, given the added costs and risks associated with the remediation of significant soil and groundwater contamination, and infrastructure improvements. The following sections describe how these factors adversely affect the PCD. "The 1988 blight finding included in the PCD Report to Council that corresponds to the blighting condition of factors that inhibit the proper use of buildings or lots is the economic dislocation, deterioration, or disuse resulting from faulty planning. (CRL Section 33032(x)) Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-46 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 ai 0 m ® C —= r�ii bOL (did �+ VI O r G E Ed 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m s2uiPhng 3o# E E � m m v v 0.. W Hazardous Materials Contamination As previously discussed in Section C.3.a, the remediation of toxic or hazardous waste is frequently costly and a major financial disincentive to reinvestment or development. Often, in order for the development of a contaminated site to be feasible, public agency assistance is necessary. The fear of environmental liability, in particular, uncertainty over changing responsibility standards and costs, and the high price of conducting environmental investigations are some of the leading reasons deterring the beneficial development and use of urban sites. Developers fear that they will face liability under environmental laws and that the cost of evaluating and remediating contaminated sites is both so uncertain and so high that it could easily outweigh the market value of the property. The blight analysis included a review of existing environmental cases and spill sites in the PCD, as reported by DTSC and SWRCB. Of the 13 DTSC sites within the City, 4 sites are located in the PCD. Three out of the four sites contained minor soil contamination that has been remediated or is in the process of remediation. The remaining site is located on Lakeville Street and is owned by McPhail's Inc., an appliance company. According to the site's DTSC Profile Report, the site was formerly a foundry that generated metal slag as waste from its operations and contained an above ground tank for diesel fuel storage. The site was contaminated with significant amounts of lead, "Total Petrolium Hydrocarbons" and asbestos." As part of the remediation process, McPhail's Inc. capped the majority of the contaminated site. Even though some remediation efforts have occurred, future uses may be limited due to the extent of soil contamination beneath the cap. The California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA) through the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Control Board regulates the Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups Program (SLIC). Sites in the SLIC program are generally small to medium size industrial sites with non -fuel contamination. Of the 20 sites listed within the City, seven are within the PCD. Refer to Table H-7 below for a list of SLICs in the PCD. The State Water Resource Control Board lists approximately 190 reported sites with Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFTs) within the City, approximately 77 of which are in the PCD. Table II -8, on following pages, lists the LUFTs in the PCD. Figure H-11 shows the location of the LUFTs and SLICs in the PCD. Table H-7 Spills, Leaks, Investigations and Cleanups (SLIC) Sites in the PCD Owner Name Address Joseph Felix Realty Co. 101-181 North McDowell Blvd Former Winston Tires 181 North McDowell Blvd 1 Mr. Marshall Barlas EB Equipment 430 Bailey Ave Rinehart's Petaluma Truck Stop 2645 Petaluma Blvd S 1 California Gold Dairy Products 51 Lakeville St j George Barta Hide Company 896 Lakeville St Two Rock Finishers 821 Petaluma Blvd N 1 Source: California State Water Resource Control Board, Geotracker, January 2005. 48 Department of Toxic and Substance Control, Site Cleanup — Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Database, Profile Report, ID: 49420003—McPhail's Inc., March 2005. Petaluma Community Development Commission I1-48 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table II -8 Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFTs) in the PCD Site Name Street Number Street Name Barlas Feed 430 Bailey Ave Ricci Bros. Trucking 1 Cedar Grove Park P G & E Service Center 210 Corona Rd J & D Automotive 278 Corona Rd Coin Amusement (former) 416 D St E Mike Hudson Distributing 1297 Dynamic St Maltby Electric Supply 1200 Holm Rd Smith Property (former) 1290 Holm Rd Laura Scudder's 1314 Holm Rd Pomeroy, J.H., & Co. 500 Hopper St Shamrock Materials 400 Hopper St Petaluma Corp. Yard 840 Hopper St Petaluma School Dist. 526 Jefferson St Hunt & Behrens 30 Lakeville St California Gold Dairy Property 51 Lakeville St Clover Stometta Truck Garage 51 Lakeville St Clover Stornetta 91 Lakeville St Brody Property 91 Lakeville St Maddalena Dairy Supply 139 Lakeville St Jerry & Don's Pump & Well 151 Lakeville St Kaiser Sand & Gravel 950 Lakeville St McPhail's, Inc. 1000 Lakeville St Lakeville Shell 1001 Lakeville St Don's Plumbing 1004 Lakeville St Henris Supply Warehouse 172 Landing Way Ingerson Trucking 979 Lindberg Ln Petaluma School Bus Yard 993 Lindberg Ln Larry's Auto Body Shop 412 Madison St Western Charter Tours 67 Magnolia Ave Arco Station #2150 101 McDowell Blvd N Kmart Store #3501 261 McDowell Blvd N Bostrom Property 745 McDowell Blvd N Viking Freight Systems 1230 McDowell Blvd N Dividend Development Corp 1250 McDowell Blvd N Viacom Cable Vision 1289 McDowell Blvd N Steel Bear Deli 5155 Old Redwood Hwy 7 -Eleven Store #24323 5300 Old Redwood Hwy Petaluma Exxon 7-0241 (Former) 5153 Old Redwood Hwy N Jos. Ellwood Comm. Ctr. 301 Payran St Toby's Trucking, Inc. 421 Payran St North Bay Construction 431 Payran St Bay Cities Concrete Pump. 444 Payran St Petaluma Maint. Station 611 Payran St Blunfs Garage 415 Petaluma Blvd N Continued on next page Petaluma Community Development Commission 11.49 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table II -8 Continued Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFTs) in the PCD Site Name Street Number Street Name Raintree Car Wash & Gas 420 Petaluma Blvd N Shotwell's Auto Body 600 Petaluma Blvd N Burkhart's BP Service 701 Petaluma Blvd N Heritage Motors 822 Petaluma Blvd N Chevron #99728 (former) 860 Petaluma Blvd N Shell - Favorite Car Wash 900 Petaluma Blvd N R.O. Shelling 909 Petaluma Blvd N Plaza Chevrolet 1221 Petaluma Blvd N Cal West Rentals 1300 Petaluma Blvd N Arolo Company 1490 Petaluma Blvd N Boulevard Deli 3590 Petaluma Blvd N Bob Benson Honda 4246 Petaluma Blvd N Shell Service Station 4990 Petaluma Blvd N Unocal #5406 4998 Petaluma Blvd N Chevron #98548 4999 Petaluma Blvd N Hlebakos & Sons Trucking 1473 Petaluma Blvd S Caltrans S. Maint. Sta. 1485 Petaluma Blvd S West Sonoma Co. Disposal 2543 Petaluma Blvd S Office Helper Products 1330 Ross St Leonard Jay Development 1334 Ross St Rubini Property 1312 Scott St Dave's Trucking (Former) - 0258 100 Stony Point Rd Point Plastics 1310 Stub Rd Unocal #6214 (Former) 440 Washington St E Petaluma Car Wash 483 Washington St E Triple S Tires 527 Washington St E Exxon 7-0240 (Former) 532 Washington St E Silva Partnership 601 Washington St E Petaluma Development 627 Washington St E Shell Service Station 801 Washington St E Sonoma Marin Fairgrounds 866 Washington St E Schram Property 300 Water St Complete Auto Service 296 Wilson St Source: California State Water Resource Control Board, Geotracker, January 2005. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1I-50 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 L'. c 7.LOTtA u - Earthquakes Earthquake hazards affect the entire PCD. These include proximity to dangerous earthquake faults, buildings that are susceptible to damage during an earthquake, and soils conditions that amplify seismic shaking. These conditions add greatly to the cost of building rehabilitation and new construction. For more detail, refer to section B.I.a. Standard seismic hazard design requirements will be imposed on all new development within the PCD in accordance with County and City standards to mitigate the risk of damage posed by an earthquake." Adverse Soil Conditions As has been previously described in section B.l.a, a large part of the PCD has adverse soil conditions, including areas of bay mud. Not only do these conditions add significantly to earthquake hazards, but they also may add substantially to the cost of new construction. In fact, in areas characterized by the presence of bay mud, costly pilings would be required to provide support and stability for anything but the smallest buildings. Flooding As described in section B.l.b, a substantial part of the PCD is subject to flooding during periods of heavy rainfall and high tides on the Petaluma River. The most recent flood occurrence on December 31, 2005 caused extensive flooding in the PCD areas including many roadways, small businesses, Petaluma Village Premium Outlets, the auto mall and mobile home parks. While the recently completed $40 million Corps of Engineers Flood Control project was successful in protecting properties downstream of the Flood Control project, flooding still occurred in many parts of the PCD, as shown in the photographs in Appendix B. The City requires that development within areas subject to periodic flooding build the first floor at least one foot above the 100 year flood level. In the areas described in section B.La, one to five feet of earth fill may be needed to meet this requirement. As a result such development is often much more costly than development in areas without flooding problems. And, since adjoining streets are typically not elevated, properties fronting on these streets may have limited access during periods of flooding. The 2002 Petaluma Existing Conditions report states that a significant portion of commercial land between Petaluma Boulevard North and Highway 101 remains undeveloped due to flooding constraints." Obsolete Buildines The presence of obsolete buildings inhibits the proper use of neighboring properties and discourages investment needed to ensure timely revitalization of the area. A number of obsolete buildings are present in the PCD: • Nine buildings in the PCD are of unreinforced masonry (URM) construction. Although five URM buildings have been retrofitted and rehabilitated, the cost of retrofitting and rehabilitating the remaining four to a safe standard may be economically infeasible given the current market rents. There are several special purpose buildings (such as grain warehouses and old factories) that are no longer in demand. These conditions are illustrated in photographs 102 and 116 located in Appendix B 49 Environmental Impact Report, PCDC, 1988, pg. S. so Petaluma General Plan 2025 Existing Conditions, Opportunities, and Challenges Report, October 10, 2002, p. 4-28. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-52 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 a.3 Incompatible Uses 133031(a)(3)151 Over time, many of the uses within the PCD have shifted, resulting in incompatible uses being located next to one another. These incompatible uses include agricultural/industrial uses adjacent to residential neighborhoods and commercial vehicle storage in residential neighborhoods. The locations of these conditions are shown in Figure 1I-12. Examples of mixed character and incompatible land uses can be seen in photographs 91, 139 and 159 in Appendix B. a.4 Substandard Lots of Multiple Ownership 133031(a)(4)1" Parcels of irregular form, shape, and size and fragmented ownership, in combination with environmental restrictions on development inhibit development of parcels, suppressing the potential for reuse of the land and higher assessed values. Parcels of irregular shape and size are interspersed along both sides of Petaluma Boulevard North and along East Washington Street. The PCD also contains landlocked parcels (i.e., a parcel enclosed by other parcels without direct access to the public right of way). In general, these parcels are located behind parcels along North Petaluma Boulevard and abut the Northwestern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, leaving no access to a public right-of-way. See Figure II -12 for the locations of these parcels. b. Economic Blighting Conditions b.l Depreciated Values or Impaired Investments [33031(b)(1)]s3 This section documents the presence of blighting conditions described in CRL Section 3303l(b)(1) in the PCD, including the presence of potentially hazardous or toxic materials, poor sales tax trends, obsolete buildings and flooding. Hazardous Materials As discussed in Section D.3.a, hazardous materials and toxic contamination are present within the PCD. The contamination, the unknown cost to redevelop parcels, and the safety concerns while remediating the parcels impair the value of the 77 properties with LUFTs and 7 parcels with SLICs in the PCD. 51 The 1988 blight finding included in the PCD Report to Council that corresponds to the blighting condition of incompatible uses is age, obsolescence, deteriomtion, dilapidation, mixed character or shifting of uses. (CRL Section 33031(e)) 52 The 1988 blight findings included in the PCD Report to Council that correspond to the blighting condition of substandard lots of multiple ownership is the subdividing and sales of lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development (CRL Section 33032(6)), and the laying out of lots in disregard of the contours and other topography or physical characteristics of the ground and surrounding conditions (CRL Section 33032(c)). 53 The 1988 blight findings included in the PCD Report to Council that correspond to the blighting condition of depreciated values or impaired investments is the economic dislocation, deterioration, or disuse resulting from faulty planning (CRL Section 33032(a)), and a prevalence of depreciated values, impaired investments, and social and economic maladjustment (CRL Section 33032(e)). Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-53 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 a Obsolete Buildings Faulty planning and/or obsolescent buildings continue to contribute to deterioration and disuse of properties within the PCD. Uses in the PCD have also shifted over time, resulting in obsolete structures and incompatible uses being located adjacent to one another, as discussed in Section D.3.a above. These conditions contribute to depreciated values in the PCD and detract from investment potential. While portions of the PCD have been redeveloped, numerous examples of depreciated values and impaired investments remain within the PCD. Many of the commercial and residential structures are older and have not been well maintained, were constructed from poor materials, or do not meet the changes in building standards or evolving infrastructure. The age and obsolescence of many of the structures in the PCD do not meet the modern day needs of the City of Petaluma. Flooding As discussed in Section B. Lb, the PCD is also subject to flooding, and residences and businesses have been damaged by flooding in the past. Increased development in the PCD will require improvements and channel stabilization to mitigate increased risk of flood damage. b.2 Economic Indicators of Distressed Buildings or Lots 133031(b)(2)1' This section documents the presence of the blighting condition economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots, as described in CRL Section 33031(b)(2) in the PCD, including low lease rates and vacant and underutilized lots. Vacant and Underutilized Lots A large number of unimproved and improved parcels in the PCD are currently undemtilized, including vacant parcels and parcels used for parking or vehicle storage. A number of these parcels contain overgrown vegetation and/or standing water, indicating the extent of underutilization. These conditions are documented in photographs 76, 77, 82-89, 101, 122, 141, 142, 147, 148, 152, 161, 169, 173, 182, 189, and 191-194 located in Appendix B. Additionally, the 2002 Petaluma Existing Conditions report identifies vacant and underutilized land adjacent to the Highway 101 interchange at Lakeville Street, along North McDowell Boulevard and between Highway 101, the Petaluma River and die railroad tracks.55 The locations of vacant and underutilized parcels are indicated in Figure 11-13. Vacant and Underutilized Buildines As discussed in Section C.2.b, the presence of vacant and underutilized buildings represent a lack of demand for space in a particular area. The lack of demand can occur for a number of reasons including the age and condition of buildings in the area, the compatibility of the buildings to different uses, or conditions in the economy or overall market. The PCD has suffered from high vacancy rates in the office sector. 54 The 1988 blight finding included in the PCD Report to Council that corresponds to the blighting condition of economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots is the economic dislocation, deterioration, or disuse resulting from faulty planning. (CRL Section 33032(x)) 55 Petaluma General Plan 2025 Existing Conditions, Opportunities, and Challenges Report, October 10, 2002, pp. 4-13,4-22 and 4-25. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-55 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 5-1 nw "T2 According to data gathered from a broker survey performed by Seifel Consulting, the City's office vacancy rates for existing space are between 18 and 21 percent. When the sublease market is included the vacancy rate jumps to 27 percent. According to brokers knowledgeable of the area, the extremely high vacancy rates in the Redwood Business Park significantly contribute to the City's overall vacancy rate. These rates are extremely high, particularly when compared with the vacancy rates in nearby Santa Rosa, which has an office vacancy rate of between 9 and 15 percent. Examples of vacant and underutilized buildings in the PCD can be seen in Appendix B in the following photographs: 80, 94-96, 112, 113, 126, 133, 137, 143-145, 153, 160, 179, 180, 187, and 188. b.3 Inadequate Public Improvements [33030(e)]56 As described in Section C.3.c above, prior to 1994, inadequate public improvements was a factor of blight under the CRL, and the PCDC made findings that the PCD exhibited this blighting condition at the time of plan adoption in 1988. This blighting condition continues to exist in the PCD and is described as a blighting condition. Under current blight definitions in the CRL, the presence of inadequate public improvements cannot be the sole reason for redevelopment. However, as described above, CRL Section 33030(c) permits consideration of inadequate public improvements when blighting conditions exist in a project area. Inadequate public improvements may be a contributing factor to blight, and an agency may undertake needed public improvements to alleviate blight. To the extent they are present, inadequate public improvements typically reflect problems that exaggerate the effects of blight. Deteriorated and substandard public improvements and facilities, along with physical and economic blighting conditions continue to hinder development in the PCD. Remaining deficient public improvements within the PCD include: • Poor vehicular access, circulation deficiencies, and street conditions Sewer system deficiencies • Storm drainage and flood control deficiencies Poor Vehicular Access Circulation Deficiencies and Street Conditions Vehicular access and circulation in the PCD is substandard and results in safety hazards to drivers and pedestrians. Collision data from 1996 to 2000 indicates that the streets with the greatest number of collisions during that period are within the PCD. These streets are Petaluma Boulevard, Washington Street and McDowell Boulevard. Three of the seven intersections with the greatest number of collisions are in the PCD 57 These intersections are: • East Washington Street/McDowell Boulevard East Washington Street/Ellis Street/Kenilworth Drive • East Washington Street/Payran Street 56 The 1988 blight finding included in the PCD Report to Council that corresponds to the blighting condition of inadequate public improvements is the existence of inadequate public improvements, public facilities, open spaces and utilities which cannot be remedied by private or governmental action without redevelopment. (CRL Section 33032(d)) 57 Petaluma General Plan 2025: Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Challenges Report, Dyett & f1hatia, October 2007, on. 7-28 through 7-31. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-57 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Participants at a community workshop held by the City in October 2001 identified "pedestrian hot spots" or areas that need pedestrian improvements. Downtown Petaluma, Petaluma Boulevard and Highway 101 interchanges were identified as areas needing improvements" Level of Service (LOS) was analyzed for Petaluma's roadways and intersections in 2001. The LOS grading system ranges from A (free flow with little or no delay) to F (forced flow with long queues and delays). Five of nine intersections in the City that were determined to operate at LOS of "D" or worse are in the PCD.` These intersections are: Petaluma Boulevard/Corona Road • McDowell Boulevard/Corona Road McDowell Boulevard/Washington Street • Lakeville highway/Caulfield Lane • Petaluma Boulevard/Payran Street/Magnolia Avenue A significant portion of the PCD exhibits substandard street conditions including unpaved streets, extensively deteriorated street pavement, missing sidewalks and curbs and inoperable, abandoned railroad tracks. Street condition deficiencies create potential safety hazards for vehicle operators and pedestrians, and impede vehicular access and circulation. Deteriorated or missing curbs and gutters result in ponding and flooding on street surfaces. Field reconnaissance surveys showed extensive street deficiencies particularly along Petaluma Boulevard South at the Highway 101 Petaluma Boulevard South exit, Rovina Lane, Hawthorne Court, Shasta Avenue, Copeland Street, Lindberg Lane, and East Court. Field reconnaissance surveys also identified abandoned inoperable railroad tracks, which create safety hazards for vehicle operators, along Hopper Street, Petaluma Boulevard South near Highway 101, and Petaluma Boulevard South and South Point Boulevard. Sewer Svstem According to Dean Eckerson, Engineering Manager for the City's Department of Water Resources and Conservation Department, the wastewater treatment plant serving the whole City is in the PCD and was built in 1937. This plant is beyond its useful life and currently experiences capacity issues. Furthermore, portions of the PCD have no sanitary sewer service. The northeast part of the PCD around Petaluma Boulevard North and Jesse Lane must use septic systems due to the lack of sewer service fi0 In addition, the pump stations in this area are inadequate to add additional users, and the topography is too steep for appropriate pumping." Parcels of vacant land on Petaluma Boulevard near the Highway 101 North Petaluma Boulevard southbound exit also lack sewer system connections. This area's development potential is limited by the lack of a sewer system and the cost to install sewer system connections is prohibitive. 58Ibid., pp. 7-21 through 7-22. 59 Petaluma General Plan 2025: Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Challenges Report, Dyea & Ithatia, October 2002, p. 7-12 through 7-14. 60 This area is part of the County of Sonoma, which according to the Eckerson, is the reason why the area is not part of the City's sewer service. 61 Interview with Dean Eckerson, Engineering Manager, City of Petaluma Department of Water Resources and Conservation Department, March 29, 2005. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-55 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Storm Drainaee and Flood Control Substantial storm drainage issues exist in the PCD. According to Eckerson, the storm drainage systems in the older neighborhoods tend to be inadequate and deteriorated, specifically along and around Edith Street and Corona Road. In addition, areas of Lakeville Street experience significant drainage problems; however, the most problematic areas of the street are viable wetlands, limiting the City's ability to install storm drainage pipes.b'- Photogranhic Documentation Refer to photographs 76-78, 82-85, 87-89, 92, 93, 98, 102, 105, 106, 110, 111, 113, 116, 117, 120, 131, 141, 144, 145, 150, 156, 157, 162, 173, 181, 189, 193 and 195-203 in Appendix B for examples of public improvement deficiencies described above, including flooding and ponding, deteriorated street pavement, lack of sidewalks and curbs and abandoned railroad tracks. 4. Conclusions for Remaining Blighting Conditions for the PCD The PCD still suffers from several physical and economic blighting conditions. The following statutorily defined conditions of physical and economic blight are substantial and prevalent in the PCD: • Deficient or deteriorated buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. • Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. • Incompatible uses. • Substandard lots. • Depreciated values and impaired investments. • Economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots. • Inadequate public improvements. The factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of building or lots in the PCD include hazardous materials contamination, flooding, obsolete space, earthquakes and adverse soil conditions. These conditions contribute to the economic blighting conditions of high building vacancies and limited reinvestment in properties. The depreciated values or impaired investments in the PCD include hazardous materials, obsolete buildings and flooding. The economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots in the PCD include underutilized and vacant commercial buildings and spaces, which contribute to general economic decline of the PCD. The analysis of blighting conditions in the PCD indicates that these conditions are so substantial and prevalent that they constitute physical and economic blight. Thus, redevelopment is necessary for the PCD to reach its full potential. 62 Id. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-59 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 E. Overall Conclusions for Blighting Conditions The Project Areas suffer from several physical and economic blighting conditions. The following statutorily defined conditions of physical and economic blight hinder the Project Areas: • Deficient or deteriorated buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. • Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. Adjacent or nearby incompatible uses. Substandard lots or inadequately sized lots in multiple ownership. Depreciated values and impaired investments. Economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots. Public improvement deficiencies, although no longer statutorily defined blighting factor, also contribute to blight in the Project Areas. Continued redevelopment is necessary for the Project Areas to reach their full potential. Petaluma Community Development Commission 11-60 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 III. Redevelopment Program Description A. Introduction This chapter describes the Petaluma Community Development Commission's (PCDC) Redevelopment Program, including the projects, activities and expenditures to implement the Redevelopment Program under the Fiscal Merger. It describes how the Redevelopment Program will alleviate the blighting conditions and summarizes the anticipated cost for the Redevelopment Program. The Redevelopment Program is designed to meet the objectives of the CRL and the Redevelopment Plans' goals and objectives, as well as to enable the PCDC to accelerate its Redevelopment Program throughout the two Project Areas. The Redevelopment Program for each Project Area will not be modified by this amendment. Each of the Project Areas will continue to be governed by its own Redevelopment Plan with its respective Redevelopment Program, set of redevelopment goals and objectives, and time limits. Under the proposed Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, fiscal limits for tax increment collection and outstanding indebtedness would be combined and the bonded indebtedness limit would be increased. While the Redevelopment Program for each individual Redevelopment Project will not be modified as a result of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, this chapter synthesizes the Redevelopment Program planned for the individual Project Areas into one merged Redevelopment Program for ease of administration and to facilitate implementation. Section B of this chapter discusses the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plans. Section C describes the relationship between the Redevelopment Program and the alleviation of blighting conditions. Section D describes PCDC's Non -Housing Redevelopment Program and its projects and activities. Section D also includes summaries of deficiencies to be corrected and cost estimates of the proposed projects and activities. Section E describes the Affordable Housing Program. (Refer to Chapter IV for a description of the sources that may be used by PCDC to help fond the proposed projects and activities.) PCDC's costs of implementing the Redevelopment Program in constant 2006 dollars are $164.7 million for the PCDC Non -Housing Redevelopment Program and $78.4 million for the Affordable Housing Program. '- Since adoption of the Redevelopment Plans, PCDC has undertaken a number of projects and activities to alleviate blight in the Project Areas. (Refer to Chapter II for a summary of projects and activities undertaken to date in the Project Areas.) The continued presence of adverse conditions warrants continued redevelopment activities. PCDC is currently in the process of implementing redevelopment activities that will facilitate the development of the vacant and underutilized areas of the Project Areas and revitalize commercial corridors and residential neighborhoods. t PCDC Non-FIousing Redevelopment Program costs of $164.7 million (constant 2006 dollars) are the available funds projected to remain over the life of the redevelopment plans after the deduction of pass through payments to taxing entities, the affordable housing set-aside fund, FY 2005/06 ERAF obligation, and PCDC non -housing administration costs. '- The term 2006 dollars or constant 2006 dollars is used to indicate the present value of future dollars discounted back by FY 20005/2006. For more information, refer to discussion on present value assumption in Section F.2 of Chapter N. Petaluma Community Development Commission I11-1 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 The Fiscal Merger will allow PCDC to combine the financial resources of the CBD and PCD in efforts to better implement its Redevelopment Program, which will eliminate blighting conditions in both Project Areas. It will provide flexibility to combine and focus revenues from one Project Area on the needs of the other Project Area and will allow PCDC to adjust that focus over time so that the community's overall redevelopment needs can be addressed in it more efficient and effective manner. Thus, the Fiscal Merger will accelerate the alleviation of the physical and economic blighting conditions. B. Redevelopment Plan Goals and Objectives The Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger will achieve the purposes of the CRL, the City's General Plan and the Central Petaluma Specific Plan. Each of the Project Areas' goals and objectives, previously summarized in Section D of Chapter 1, were established when the existing Redevelopment Plans were adopted and amended. The goals and objectives are focused on eliminating physical and economic blight and revitalizing the Project Areas. Together with land use regulations, such as the Central Petaluma Specific Plan, River Enhancement Plan and Bicycle Plan, the Redevelopment Plan goals and objectives will continue to guide the direction of all future development within the Project Areas. C. Relationship Between the Redevelopment Program and Alleviation of Blighting Conditions The Redevelopment Program will continue to alleviate the blighting conditions that interfere with revitalization of the Project Areas by improving economic conditions; stimulating private development; improving public infrastructure, circulation, parking and facilities; and meeting PCDC's affordable housing obligation. The Redevelopment Program meets the CRL requirement that PCDC expenditures be linked to the elimination of blighting conditions. Portions of the Project Areas suffer from a variety of physical and economic blighting conditions, as documented in Chapter ll, that must be alleviated if these areas are to continue their revitalization. In general, the Redevelopment Program is designed to: Revitalize areas that exhibit physical and economic blight. Stimulate private investment and appropriate development. Improve circulation, public infrastructure and public facilities. Provide tax increment funds for the redevelopment activities that are needed to alleviate blighting conditions. • Create affordable housing. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1I1-2 Preliminary Report Petaluma Pian Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 PCDC's Redevelopment Program is organized broadly into five categories that reflect the division of tax increment revenues into funds that can be used for any redevelopment purpose (Non -Housing Redevelopment Program) and those specifically related to PCDC's affordable housing endeavors (Affordable Housing Program). The order of presentation of the categories is for identification purposes only, and is not intended to indicate the category's relative priority for implementation: Circulation, Landscaping and Parking Improvements Public Facilities and Infrastructure • Economic Development • Building Rehabilitation Site Preparation and Development Affordable Housing (Refer to Section E) Table III -1 provides a matrix summarizing the relationship between the blighting conditions described in Chapter R and the projects and activities proposed to alleviate these conditions. Section D includes a summary of the deficiencies to be corrected by the Redevelopment Program. Petaluma Community Development Commission 111-3 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 u a �O � 7 ■ c� 0 ax C O C � U � E u n o 0. A .. so d0 C1 �c c¢ ■ 0.. e 0 C a ■ ■ tu ❑ � a N x a .. u ,a d U O U A .. so d0 C1 �c c¢ ■ 0.. ■ ■ ■ � o Q N � Q c ,a E Q P] o .8• y C u o o E U � o d P N N N N r O O �+ m o U m N E a R • v � oo E W � t .. so d0 C1 �c c¢ ■ 0.. � o Q Q E Q y C u o U � o C1 p o �+ m o U Q c m W � t U N O a � ■ ■ y v G a C Q' L E- a E � a U n m 9 C L O G IT 0.' U o sep d E b o G 0 ■ ■ p y O' y o co c a •- a Ca � u m cu c ❑ �w CNj O� H 9 a 0 O N U O E U C •O O U U � •E mem- U o v w EE E Q E E ❑ a n ca v a� a a A Description of PCDC's Non -Housing Redevelopment Program This section describes PCDC's proposed Non -Housing Redevelopment Program, including the deficiencies to be corrected and project and activity descriptions. The projects and activities are intended to reflect the general statement of goals and objectives that are contained in the Redevelopment Plans and referenced in Section D of Chapter I. Table III -2 summarizes the Redevelopment Program's project and activities. As they are implemented, these projects and activities may be modified over time to better serve the purposes of redevelopment. Cost estimates are necessarily preliminary in nature and subject to considerable refinement as the Redevelopment Program planning and implementation proceeds. However, the cost estimates are adequate to provide reasonable orders of magnitude for the financial feasibility evaluation and the need for tax increment financing. Table III -3, included at the end of this chapter, summarizes the total estimated costs of PCDC's proposed Redevelopment Program. Circulation, Landscaping and Parking Improvements a. Deficiencies to be Corrected The blighting conditions described in Chapter II and shown in Appendix B need to be alleviated in order to enhance the Project Areas. Many of the existing streets within the project areas are in poor condition. Additionally, the overall street grid is incomplete and fragmented, with many dead end streets, particularly along the river in the CBD. The Project Areas also lack sufficient well-developed pedestrian and bicycle networks. The poor street conditions and circulation problems are a danger to the community, as is evidenced by the amount of traffic and the high number of accidents in the Project Areas. These conditions hinder economic development in the area. Furthermore, the lack of sufficient parking negatively impacts rent levels and development in the CBD. b. Projects and Activities The circulation, landscaping and parking improvements projects and activities will address roadway, streetscape and transportation related deficiencies. PCDC will assist in funding transit, bicycle, pedestrian and parking improvements in the Project Areas. This category also includes beautification activities such as lighting and landscaping improvements, and Gateway improvements. Circulation, landscaping and parking improvements include, but are not limited to the following: • Improve, construct and reconstruct roadway, streetscape and transportation related infrastructure to improve circulation and access to underutilized areas, provide additional access to the Downtown and mitigate adverse effects of new development. • Assist in funding transit improvements in the Project Areas. • Repair, rehabilitate and improve bicycle and pedestrian networks in the Project Areas. • Construct trail, walkway, pedestrian river crossing, lighting, and landscape improvements to attain the objectives of the Petaluma River Enhancement Plan. • Prepare, design and establish funding mechanisms for crosstown transportation infrastructure to facilitate redevelopment. Continue to undertake and provide assistance for street beautification projects. Continue to provide assistance for parking improvements, including incentives to shift existing parking areas from the river's edge to convenient areas away from the river. Petaluma Community Development Commission 111-5 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table RI -2 Redevelopment Program Non -Housing and Housing Projects and Activities Project and Activities Descriptions 1, Circulation, Landscaping and Parking Improvements A. Improve, construct and reconstruct roadway, streetscape and transportation related infrastructure to improve circulation and access to underutilized areas, provide additional access to the Downtown and mitigate adverse effects of new development. B. Assist in funding transit improvements in the Project Areas. C. Repair, rehabilitate and improve bicycle and pedestrian environment in the Project Areas. D. Construct trail, walkway, pedestrian river crossing, lighting. and landscape improvements to attain the objectives of the Petaluma River Enhancement Plan. E. Prepare, design and establish funding mechanisms for crosstown transportation infrastructure to facilitate redevelopment. F. Continue to undertake and provide assistance for street beautification projects. G. Continue to provide assistance for parking improvements, including incentives to shift existing parking areas from the rivers edge to convenient areas away from the river. 2, Public Facilities and Infrastructure A. Improve public infrastructure as needed, including fire stations and water, sewer, wastewater, storm drainage and flood control systems. B. Undertake undergrounding of electrical utilities. C. Continue to facilitate renovation of the Petaluma Railroad Depot and assist in relocation of railroad track behind Depot. D. Rehabilitate, install, acquire and improve parks, playgrounds, libraries and other public buildings and structures. 3, Economic Development A. Provide incentives for private sector investment in underutilized and vacant commercial areas north of the Petaluma River, Riverfront Warehouse District and Petaluma Boulevard. B. Provide incentives to encourage mixed-use development oriented to the Petaluma River and to transit nodes. C. Promote the development of retail, entertainment, lodging and related facilities that will strengthen the city center, reinforce downtown businesses and help attract visitors. D. Promote private sector development of residential uses on upper floors of commercial buildings. E. Provide incentives for the private sector investment to construct visitor lodging. F. Provide assistance to local community organizations to promote neighborhood services and programs. G. Continue to implement activities designed to strengthen existing industrial and commercial areas and attract new businesses, shoppers andjobs. H. Promote tourism to the area. q, Building Rehabilitation A. Provide assistance for seismic strengthening of commercial buildings through the Unreinforced Masonry Program. B. Provide low interest loan and matching funds for building and site rehabilitation and facade improvement programs. C. Provide incentives for private sector redevelopment of dilapidated and abandoned buildings. D. Provide incentives for fire sprinklers to buildings in the historic downtown. S. Site Preparation and Development A. Continue to facilitate hazardous materials assessment and cleanup program. B. Assist in property acquisition and site assembly. C. Provide assistance to relocate incompatible uses. D. Facilitate development projects that could include existing owner and business tenant participation. 6, Affordable Housing A. Encourage home ownership for low and moderate first-time homebuyers. B. Facilitate development of new affordable multifamily and single-family ownership and renter housing. C. Facilitate development of affordable housing for the elderly. D. Provide assistance to agencies providing transitional and permanent housing for the homeless and those in crisis. E. Assist low to moderate income homeowners and residential property owners to rehabilitate homes needing structural repairs and maintenance. Source: Petaluma Community Development Commission, Seifel Consulting Inc Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger 111-6 April 2006 2. Public Facilities and Infrastructure a. Deficiencies to be Corrected The Project Areas have significant infrastructure and public facilities deficiencies that must be resolved in order for the area to attain its full potential. These issues include water, storm drainage and sewer system deficiencies as well as joint trench utilities deficiencies. In the CBD, aging pipes of inadequate size and outdated materials make the water service and fire protection systems inadequate to serve existing and new development. The soil conditions in the CBD have led to pipe abrasions, corrosion, and clogging in the sewer system. Additionally, areas of the PCD lack sewage systems or are hindered by aging wastewater treatment plants, which are currently experiencing capacity problems. The storm drainage system in the Project Areas is sporadic and disjointed, and the majority of the system is outdated. The deficiencies in the storm drainage system lead to flooding, which can be both destructive and dangerous. Currently in the CBD, joint trench utilities except natural gas are typically distributed to properties by overhead wires on poles. These overhead wires are dangerous during storms and natural disasters and are aesthetically unappealing. b. Projects and Activities Public facilities and infrastructure projects and activities will involve the construction and installation of public improvements to upgrade the existing aged and deteriorated infrastructure systems to support private development efforts and upgrade or replace public facilities. Projects to improve the public facilities and infrastructure in the Project Areas may include improvements to water, sewer, wastewater, storm drainage and flood control systems. The PCDC will assist in funding the construction of new and rehabilitated public facilities and infrastructure within or serving the Project Areas. Public facilities and infrastructure projects and activities may include, but are not limited to the following: • Improve public infrastructure as needed, including fire stations and water, sewer, wastewater, storm drainage and flood control systems. • Undertake undergrounding of electrical utilities. • Continue to facilitate renovation of the Petaluma Railroad Depot and assist in relocation of railroad track behind Depot. • Rehabilitate, install, acquire and improve parks, playgrounds, libraries and other public buildings and structures. 3. Economic Development a. Deficiencies to be Corrected As described in Chapter II and in Appendix B, the Project Areas suffer from a variety of physical and economic blighting conditions that need to be resolved in order for the areas to attain their full economic potential. Blighting conditions, such as vacant and underutilized lots and buildings, impede efficient and economically feasible development in the Project Areas. The economic development efforts will promote private investment by attracting high quality and appropriately located residential, commercial and industrial development to the Project Areas. Petaluma Community Development Commission 111-7 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 b. Projects and Activities The goal of economic development activities is to develop and promote incentives that address the specific needs of existing businesses and enhance the City's ability to attract new businesses and visitors. Projects and activities will focus on strengthening the Downtown and vacant and underutilized areas throughout the Project Areas. Furthermore, this Redevelopment Program category will assist and promote other programs to develop and enhance tourism in the Project Areas, such as the development of visitor lodging. Economic development activities may include, but are not limited to the following: • Provide incentives for private sector investment in underutilized and vacant commercial areas north of the Petaluma River, Riverfront Warehouse District and Petaluma Boulevard. Provide incentives to encourage mixed-use development oriented to the Petaluma River and to transit nodes. Promote the development of retail, entertainment, lodging and related facilities that will strengthen the city center, reinforce downtown businesses and help attract visitors. Promote private sector development of residential uses on upper floors of commercial buildings. Provide incentives for the private sector investment to construct visitor lodging. Provide assistance to local community organizations to promote neighborhood services and programs. • Continue to implement activities designed to strengthen existing industrial and commercial areas and attract new businesses, shoppers and jobs. • Promote tourism to the area. 4. Building Rehabilitation a. Deficiencies to be Corrected Many buildings in the Project Areas suffer from conditions that limit their economic potential and may make them a safety risk for the community. Appendix B documents adverse building conditions including: deteriorated and dilapidated buildings; buildings that are seismically unsafe, either due to their construction or their age; and buildings that have been abandoned and neglected. As is shown in the prototypical rehabilitation discussion and analysis in Chapter H, it is not always feasible for the private sector to rehabilitate these buildings without public assistance. b. Projects and Activities The building rehabilitation projects and activities may finance a portion of the total costs involved in the rehabilitation, retrofitting and code compliance of existing structures. It is designed to encourage existing property owners/businesses to substantially upgrade deteriorated storefronts, retrofit umeinforced masonry buildings and correct code violations to upgrade the appearance of properties and encourage new infill development. The building rehabilitation projects and activities include, but are not limited to the following: • Provide assistance for seismic strengthening of commercial buildings through the Unreinforced Masonry Program. • Provide low interest loan and matching funds for building and site rehabilitation and fagade improvement programs. Provide incentives for private sector redevelopment of dilapidated and -abandoned buildings. • Provide incentives for fires sprinklers to buildings in the historic downtown. Petaluma Community Development Commission 111-8 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 5. Site Preparation and Development a. Deficiencies to be Corrected Many properties in the Project Areas are potentially contaminated with hazardous materials, appear on environmental monitoring lists, and/or contain leaking underground fuel tanks. Portions of the Project Areas are characterized by land uses that are incompatible with each other, which prevents the economic development of those parcels. When substantial negative impacts are created by adjoining facilities or uses, the value and economic viability of properties is adversely affected. These and other blighting conditions such as substandard, deteriorated and dilapidated buildings and inadequately sized or irregularly shaped lots impede efficient and economically feasible development. Site preparation and development activities will help alleviate these blighting conditions. b. Projects and Activities Site preparation and development projects and activities will facilitate the planning and site preparation on parcels within the Project Areas. This program will also provide funding and other assistance to aid in remediation and property acquisition. Site preparation and development projects and activities include, but are not limited to the following: • Continue to facilitate hazardous materials assessment and cleanup program. • Assist in property acquisition and site assembly. • Provide assistance to relocate incompatible uses. Facilitate development projects that could include existing owner and business tenant participation. E. Description of PCDC's Affordable Housing Redevelopment Program This section describes the Affordable Housing Program, including project and activity descriptions and estimated project costs. a. Deficiencies to be Corrected and CRL Requirements to be Attained Throughout the Project Area many multifamily and single family residential buildings are in need of rehabilitation. In addition, some commercial and industrial properties are particularly suitable for redevelopment as housing or mixed use development (commercial and housing). PCDC will continue to implement a key provision of the CRL, the enhancement of affordable housing opportunities for households earning at or below 120 percent of median income, with particular emphasis on those households earning at or below 50 percent of median income. Section 33334.2 of the CRL requires that an agency utilize 20 percent of all tax increment revenue allocated to PCDC to increase or enhance the community's supply of affordable housing. b. Description PCDC may establish a range of housing programs that seek to enhance project design and leverage federal, state and private funding sources to develop high quality, attractive and affordable housing developments serving a diverse population. The funds set aside for die Affordable Housing Program will be used in a flexible manner in order to respond to favorable development opportunities. Petaluma Community Development Commission 111-9 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 PCDC will continue to promote the development of a wide variety of affordable housing in the community in order to enhance the vitality of the area and provide much needed housing for the City. In particular, PCDC will continue to encourage mixed use development, development of new and rehabilitation of existing rental and ownership units, infill development, mixed income development and an array of senior housing possibilities. C. Projects and Activities As part of the Affordable Housing Program, PCDC will undertake the following types of affordable housing projects and activities: Encourage home ownership for low- and moderate -income first-time homebuyers. Facilitate development of new affordable multifamily and single-family ownership and renter housing. Facilitate development of affordable housing for the elderly. Provide assistance to agencies providing transitional and permanent housing for the homeless and those in crisis. Assist low- to moderate -income homeowners and residential property owners to rehabilitate homes needing structural repairs and maintenance. Table HI -3 Estimated Net Cost to Agency of Redevelopment Program In Constant 2006 Dollars Redevelopment Program Non -Housing Program Circulation, Landscaping and Parking Improvements Public Facilities and Infrastructure Economic Development Building Rehabilitation Site Preparation and Development Affordable Housing Program` SUBTOTAL" Net Cost to PCDC° $70.8 million $24.7 million $19.8 million $19.8 million $29.6 million $164.7 million $78.4 million TOTAL $243.1 million a. Based on estimates provided by PCDC staff. Figures do not add due to rounding. b. Excludes administrative costs related to Non -Housing Program. c. Includes administrative costs related to Affordable Housing Program. Source: Petaluma Community Development Commission. Petaluma Community Development Commission I11-10 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 IV. Proposed Methods of Financing and Feasibility Chapter N describes the public and private financing aspects of the Redevelopment Program. It presents estimated total funding requirements, identities potential resources and methods of financing available to PCDC, presents projected tax increment revenues, and assesses the general financial feasibility of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. This chapter also explains why tax increment financing is a necessary part of the overall financing program to eliminate blighting conditions in the Project Areas. Blighting conditions persist in the Project Areas, and significant capital investment will be necessary to alleviate them. While PCDC continues to pursue other potential funding sources, revenues from these sources will not be sufficient to accomplish the activities needed to alleviate the blighting conditions identified in the Project Areas. Tax increment financing will be needed to continue the PCDC's efforts to revitalize the Project Areas. A. Introduction As described in Chapter 1, the primary reasons for fiscally merging the two Redevelopment Projects are to accelerate the achievement of the goals identified in the existing Redevelopment Plans as expediently as possible. Continued implementation of the redevelopment projects and activities will require substantial funding. The immediate pressure to provide funding sources for the cost of blight alleviation stems from both the necessity to mitigate the public infrastructure, public facility and environmental deficiencies, and to improve public safety, health, and welfare within the Project Areas. Persistence of unsafe building conditions, undemtilization of buildings and lots, impaired investments, and inadequacies in public improvements and facilities can only be addressed through the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, which will enhance the implementation of the Redevelopment Program. City general funds are commonly used to supplement redevelopment agency resources at the local level. However, public revenue sources such as Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) in combination with the City's general fund and other City funds are currently insufficient to cover the cost of the projects and activities proposed by PCDC to alleviate blight. Although the City and PCDC have other sources of funding, such as developer and owner participation and assessment districts, these funds are not sufficient to support the projects and activities identified by the Redevelopment Program. The resources of the public and private sectors alone without redevelopment continue to be insufficient to eliminate blighting conditions in the Project Areas. Tax increment financing continues to be the most reliable source of long term funding available to PCDC and is the only source of financing that will generate sufficient revenue to meet the funding gap. As previously described in Chapter I, the proposed Plan Amendments will fiscally merge the Central Business District Redevelopment Project (CBD) and the Petaluma Community Development Project (PCD) and merge and increase the bonded indebtedness caps of each Project Area. Specifically, the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger will create a combined dollar limit on the amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness for the CBD and the PCD of $250 million. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -1 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Fiscally merging and amending the two Redevelopment Projects will offer substantial benefits. With more flexibility in funding, the projects and activities needed to address the blighting conditions in the Project Areas as described in Chapter II would be able to be completed earlier than anticipated. The Redevelopment Program described in Chapter III will enhance the viability and expansion of businesses and continue the revitalization of the Project Areas, thereby creating job opportunities for residents of the Project Areas and for the community as a whole. Finally, the acceleration of tax increment revenues to PCDC resulting from investment that will be stimulated by the enhanced and accelerated redevelopment activities would generate more funds for improving and expanding the supply of affordable housing in the community. This chapter is organized as follows: A. Introduction B. Stimulation of private investment C. Estimated funding requirements D. Potential sources other than tax increment financing E. Tax increment financing as the primary source of funding F. Assumptions used in tax increment projections G. Tax increment projections H. Financial feasibility of the Redevelopment Program I. Necessity of tax increment financing and Fiscal Merger B. Stimulation of Private Investment A major goal of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger is to accelerate private investment in the PCD and the CBD. Public investment in the form of redevelopment funding will be used to leverage private investment. Private investment is anticipated to include new commercial and residential development on vacant or underutilized parcels and the rehabilitation of commercial and residential buildings in many parts of the Project Areas. Over time, such investment could be significant. However, private investment in these areas will depend upon the improvement of public facilities and infrastructure, the elimination of blighting conditions, and the establishment of a positive climate for private participation. Given the extent of blighting conditions and the need for improved public facilities and infrastructure, effective implementation of the Redevelopment Program through the use of tax increment financing provides the most reasonable opportunity for stimulating private investment in the area. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -2 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 C. Estimated Funding Requirements The implementation of the Redevelopment Program will require substantial funding. Chapter III describes the Redevelopment Program, specifically identifying the projects and activities and their associated costs.' PCDC cost estimates presented in Chapter III take into account the amount of funds that PCDC anticipates it will leverage under each Redevelopment Program category. The estimated net cost of the Redevelopment Program, as described in Chapter III and shown in Table IV -1, totals approximately $242.9 million (in constant 2006 dollars).' The cost of the Redevelopment Program excludes offsetting funding from non -tax increment sources that will supplement PCDC funds (as described in Section D of this chapter and Appendix Q. Table IV -1 Estimated Net Cost to PCDC of Redevelopment Program In Constant 2006 dollars Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Net Cost Redevelopment Program to PCDC° Non -Housing Program Circulation, Landscaping and Parking Improvements $70.8 million Public Facilities and Infrastructure $24.7 million Economic Development $19.8 million Building Rehabilitation $19.8 million Site Preparation and Development $29.6 million SUBTOTAL' $164.7 million Affordable Housing Program` $78.4 million TOTAL $243.1 million a. Based on estimates provided by PCDC staff. Figures do not add or subtract due to rounding. Other potential funding sources include: local funds such as development exactions, assessment districts, traffic impact fees, park facilities fees, as well as state and federal funds. The PCDC will continue to leverage these funds as much as possible to accomplish its projects. b. Excludes administrative costs related to Non -Housing Program. c. Includes administrative costs related to Affordable Housing Program. Source: Petaluma Community Development Commission; Seifel Consulting. As discussed in Chapters I and 111, the Redevelopment Program for each Project Area will not be modified under the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. The term 2006 dollars or constant 2006 dollars is used to indicate the present value of future dollars discounted back to FY 2005/06. For more information, refer to discussion on oresent value assumotion in Section F.2 of this chanter. Petaluma Community Development Commission 1V-3 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 D. Potential Sources Other than Tax Increment Financing The Redevelopment Plans authorize PCDC to finance the Redevelopment Program using all available funding sources, including local, state and federal sources. Local sources include assessment districts, impact fees, interest income, the lease or sale of PCDC-owned property, tax allocation bonds, loans from sponsoring entities and other local public entities as well as the lease and sale of PCDC-owned property. PCDC will make every effort to obtain alternative funding sources as a means to accelerate the implementation of the Redevelopment Program and to minimize the required investment of tax increment revenues. PCDC also will work with the City and County and use their combined resources to secure federal, state and private funding. As appropriate, PCDC will also pursue available loan programs to maximize the leveraging of its funds. However, tax increment financing is the most reliable source of long term funding available to PCDC. It is the only source that will generate substantial revenue to meet the projected funding needs of the Redevelopment Program. Appendix C includes a matrix of a wide range of alternative funding sources that might be available to assist in financing the Redevelopment Program. It lists each potential source, the responsible entity, a summary of the source, the type of funding (grant, loan, or other), and an evaluation of the likelihood that the source could generate revenues for use in the Project Areas. Some sources may generate more funds than estimated, while others may generate less. On balance, the estimates of alternative revenues provide an initial assessment of funding availability to determine the need for tax increment revenue to fill the funding gap in the Redevelopment Program costs. Appendix C, Table C-1 groups funding sources according to whether they are primary, secondary or complementary. Funding sources considered to be unavailable or unlikely are listed in Appendix C, Table C-2. 1. Primary Funding Sources Other Than Tax Increment Revenue Tax increment financing is the only primary source of funding anticipated to be available to PCDC. Primary sources are those considered most likely to be available to provide funding for the Redevelopment Program, while secondary sources are less likely to be available. Complementary sources would not provide direct funding for the Redevelopment Program. However, they could be used for economic development, business support and expansion, neighborhood improvements, and community enhancement, which would enhance the effectiveness of the Redevelopment Program. 2. Secondary Funding Sources While less significant or less likely to be available than primary funding sources, secondary sources will continue to be used by the PCDC to accomplish its projects. The following secondary funding sources will be used by the PCDC whenever possible. These include federal, state and local funding sources as summarized below: HOME Funds Federal HOME funds provide formula grants to states and localities. This grant funding is dedicated to affordable housing, and communities often use these funds in conjunction with local nonprofit organizations. HOME funds are awarded annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to participating jurisdictions. States are automatically eligible and receive funding each year, and local jurisdictions can receive an allocation. Petaluma Community Development Commission N4 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Safe. Accountable. Flexible. and Efficient Transportation Equality Act of 2003 (SAFETEA) The goal of SAFETEA is to address the significant transportation challenges in the areas of safety, security, congestion, intermodal connectivity, and timely project delivery. The U.S. House and Senate reauthorized SAFETEA in late July of 2005, and President Bush signed it into law on August 10, 2005. The program provides $244.1 billion in guaranteed funding for highways, highway safety, and public transportation through FY 2008(09. This represents the largest single investment in surface transportation in the history of the United States. Accordingly, a considerable number of safety, finance, highway, environmental, public transportation, planning and research programs will be funded under the SAFETEA competitive federal aid program. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) administers SAFETEA funds for the Bay Area. Brownfield Economic Develooment Initiative (BEDI) The Brownfield Economic Development Initiative (BEDI) is a competitive grant program that makes funds available for the cleanup and redevelopment of environmentally contaminated and hazardous industrial or commercial sites. It is offered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and must be linked with a new Section 108 -guaranteed loan commitment (described in Complementary Funding Sources below). Transoortation for Livable Communities (TLC) Through the Transportation for Livable Communities (TLC) Program, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) offers planning grants, capital grants and the Housing Incentive Program. Planning grants are awarded to help sponsors refine and elaborate on promising project concepts. Capital grants directly support construction activities. The Housing Incentive Program awards grants to cities and counties that build high density housing within one-third mile of a major transit station or corridor with peak period service intervals of 15 minutes or less. Historic Preservation Grants -in -Aid The National Parks Service provides matching grants-in-aid to states to assist in their efforts to protect and preserve properties listed in the National Register of Historic Places. Inner Citv Ventures Fund (ICVF) The Inner City Ventures Fund (ICVF) finances community development projects that result in preserving historic properties [hat benefit low, moderate, or mixed income neighborhoods. The ICVF is made available through the National Trust for Historic Preservation. Downtown Rebound Grant The California Department of Housing and Community Development provides Downtown Rebound Grants in order to increase residential housing opportunities in an area that has housing needs and is under pressure due to lack of available land. Develoner and Pror erty Owner Participation Funds may be advanced to a city or agency by a developer or property owner in the form of a negotiated fee or grant, or a loan for public improvements that is repaid during the course of project implementation from tax increment revenues. Whenever possible, PCDC will enter into development agreements with developers who agree to contribute funding for specific improvements. Property owners will provide repayment on low interest loans or will be required to provide private funds to match agency rehabilitation grants. However, often the developer cannot afford the entire cost of blight alleviating activities without PCDC assistance. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -5 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Development Impact Fees Development Impact Fees are fees on new private development designed to mitigate specific consequences of growth. Impact fees are used to increase levels of service for future residents and businesses when required by new or heightened demand on existing services and facilities. Lease Revenues Broad authority exists to issue revenue bonds secured by sources other than tax increment, such as tenant leases on publicly owned land or in publicly owned facilities. Interest Income Some income will accrue to PCDC from the investment of tax increment revenues and proceeds. However, much, if not all, of the interest income will likely be offset by the need for PCDC to pay interest on indebtedness, including PCDC issued bonds. Actual income from this source would also be influenced by the amount of money available for investment, term of the investment, and achievable interest rates. Private Donations Private Donations by individuals, civic booster organizations, or corporate sponsors can contribute resources to the Redevelopment Program in line with donor wishes. 3. Complementary Funding Sources While not providing direct funding for the Redevelopment Program, complementary sources could provide funding for economic development, business support and expansion, neighborhood improvements, and community enhancement. The following federal, state and local funding sources may be utilized by the PCDC; however, potential funding from these sources is not anticipated to be substantial. Most of the federal and state sources would only be awarded to cities like Petaluma on a competitive basis. Local sources such as assessment districts and Mello -Roos community facility districts are subject to approval by local property owners, and the additional cost burden for blight alleviating improvements is not often feasible. Business Improvement District (BID) A business improvement district (BID) is a special type of assessment district that generates revenue to support enhanced services. Two types of BID mechanisms exist under state law: 1) Business Improvement Areas (BIAs), and 2) Property Based Improvement Districts (PBIDs). BIAS have been used widely in the State and provide for an additional fee to annual business licensing charges. However, due to the limited income generated through the business license fee, BIAS typically have had relatively narrow scopes of services. In 1994, the Property and Business Improvement District Law provided for an assessment of commercial property, paving the way for a new generation of PBIDs to eventually replace the existing BIAS. The creation of a PBID requires petition support from businesses that would pay more than 50 percent of the annual fees to be collected in the proposed area. A PBID has a cap on assessments and a five year maximum life. PBIDs require the creation of an advisory committee of property and business owners. PBID funds are most effective when leveraged with CDBG and redevelopment funds. Eligible activities include enhanced services such as maintenance, sidewalk cleaning, security, marketing and economic development. PBIDs can fund these activities as well as public improvements such as acquisition and maintenance of parking facilities, benches, trash receptacles, street lighting, decoration and public plazas. A PBID is a potential funding source for community enhancements. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -6 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Assessment Districts Assessment Districts enable a city to levy additional taxes on property within designated areas in order to finance improvements directly benefiting those areas. Bonds are issued to finance local improvements such as streets, sidewalks, and parking facilities. Typically, an assessment district is formed to undertake a particular public improvement, and bonds are issued under one of two major assessment acts: the Improvement Act of 1911 or the Improvement Bond Act of 1915. Upon the issuance of bonds, the district has the power to assess all property owners included in the district in order to repay the borrowed funds. An assessment district can be established as its own jurisdiction, or it can be included under a city's taxing system, assuming that the improvement is located entirely within a city's jurisdiction. Assessment districts are not limited by Proposition 13 and Proposition 4, and have the additional advantage of placing the costs of public facilities directly on the benefited property owners. However, Proposition 218, a 1996 state constitutional amendment, enacted more restrictive requirements for adopting an assessment district and limited the improvements and activities that can be financed through an assessment district. These requirements reduce the likelihood that an assessment district would be a viable financing option for the Redevelopment Program. Mello -Roos Communitv Facilities District (CFD) In addition to assessment districts, the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 authorizes the formation of a Community Facilities District (CFD) to be used to finance capital improvement projects and to pay for ongoing operations and maintenance of certain facilities. It is similar to an assessment district, but is authorized under separate legislation with different regulations. A CFD may be established in conjunction with a redevelopment project to undertake new public projects of joint benefit. A CFD can levy special taxes and issue bonds to finance these improvements. The formation of a CFD would require Agency approval and would require the affirmative vote of two thirds of the property owners (weighted vote based on acres owned). Housine Enabled by Local Partnershio Proeram (HELP) The HELP Program, provided by the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA), offers loans with a three percent interest rate to local government agencies for their locally determined affordable housing activities and priorities. HELP funds must be used to directly produce affordable housing units; however, flexibility is given to the government agency to determine the specific housing activity and use of the funds. The Agency's affordable housing efforts could be supported by HELP funds to directly produce affordable housing through acquisition, development, rehabilitation or preservation of affordable rental or ownership housing. These loans would likely be repaid using tax increment funds, so they do not represent additional Agency resources. CDBG Section 108 Loan Guarantees The CDBG Section 108 Loan Guarantees are funds made available through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It is a potential source of funding for economic development, housing rehabilitation, public facilities and large scale physical development projects. All projects must either principally benefit low and moderate income persons, aid in the elimination or prevention of blight, or meet an urgent need. It does not generate new funds; rather it is a loan fund secured by CDBG or other dedicated revenues, such as tax increment revenues. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -7 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds are generated statewide through a one-quarter cent tax on retail sales in each county. TDA funds may be used for transit projects, special transit projects for disabled persons, and bicycle and pedestrian purposes. The City receives an annual TDA apportionment, and the MTC determines the ways in which the funds are spent. Activities funded by TDA generally include regional and municipal transit programs, bikeway improvements and other programs designed to reduce automobile usage. TDA funds are a potential source of funds for improvements designed to reduce automobile usage, such as pedestrian and bicycle networks. Infrastructure State Revolvine Funds (ISRF) The Infrastructure State Revolving Fund (ISRF) is low cost financing program from the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (IBANK) to public agencies for a wide variety of infrastructure projects with loan terms of up to 30 years. The interest rate is fixed for the term of financing. Eligible applicants include cities, counties, special districts, assessment districts, joint powers authorities and redevelopment agencies. Eligible projects include city streets, county highways, state highways, drainage, water supply and flood control, educational facilities, environmental mitigation measures, parks and recreational features, port facilities, public transit, sewage collection and treatment, solid waste collection and disposal, water treatment distribution, defense conversion, public safety facilities, and power and communication facilities. Certified Local Government Proeram The National Historic Preservation Act enables local governments with a commitment to preservation to apply to become a Certified Local Government (CLG), and thus be eligible to compete for special federal funds. This funding can be used for various preservation activities in the community. The California Office of Historic Preservation administers the program works in partnership with these local governments to promote historic preservation efforts. Mills Act Prooerty Tax Abatement Proeram The California Office of Historic Preservation offers the Mills Act Property Tax Abatement Program. It provides eligible historic private property owners the opportunity to actively participate in the restoration of their properties while receiving property tax relief. Brownfields Cleanun Revolvine Loan Fund (BCRLF) Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund (BCRLF) is a competitive loan fund pilot that enables states and municipalities to make low interest loans for cleanup activities at brownfields sites. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers the BCRLF. Rule 20A Proeram The Rule 20A Program provides funding for the undergrounding of overhead electrical wires as well as other utilities. Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) operates the program and customers pay for it through future electric rates. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -8 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 4. Funding Sources Considered to be Unavailable or Unlikely As described above, PCDC will continue to utilize local, state, and/or federal government funds, and also funds from foundation and other private sector sources. Over twenty sources other than those outlined above were evaluated by PCDC for their potential use to fund redevelopment activities in the Project Areas. See Table C-2 in the Appendix for a list of these sources. None of these has provided or is expected to provide substantial additional financial resources to the PCDC. Furthermore, some of these sources are provided as loans that would have to be repaid from tax increment. To a large extent existing resources for improvement projects have been maximized in the Project Areas. In addition, other sources have been found to be clearly infeasible or to have little potential of generating measurable revenues. Special taxing districts are also considered unlikely. Tax increment is the primary source, and often the only source, of revenue in PCDC's Redevelopment Projects designed to alleviate blight. E. Tax Increment Financing as the Primary Source of Funding The primary source of financing for the Redevelopment Program has been, and will continue to be, tax increment revenue generated by the increase in property values from the Project Areas. Based on the assumptions outlined in this chapter, the tax increment revenues generated over the tax increment collection period are projected to be sufficient to meet PCDC costs for the Redevelopment Program (for both housing and non -housing activities) that cannot reasonably be financed from other sources. PCDC prepares an annual budget each year that sets forth its proposed expenditures. PCDC annually evaluates the projected amount of funds available from tax increment and other revenue sources and sets its annual budget taking into account the level of these funding resources. PCDC will not commit more funds on an annual basis than it projects will be available to fund the Redevelopment Program. Tax increment projections for the PCD, CBD 1976 Original Area and CBD 2001 Added Area are calculated separately. Each area has its own base assessed value and financial and time limits. This section presents an overview of the use and calculation of tax increment revenue under the CRL. Section F then describes specific considerations and assumptions relevant to the estimates of tax increment revenue that may be generated, and Section G summarizes tax increment projections. Appendix D includes detailed projections of potential tax increment revenues. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -9 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 1. Time and Fiscal Limits The CRL imposes specific time and fiscal limits on particular redevelopment activities. Refer to Table IV -2 for the base year values and financial and time limits for the Project Areas under the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. The PCD, the CBD 1976 Original Area, and the CBD 2001 Added Area have their own base assessed value and financial and time limits. The only fiscal limits to be modified under the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger are the limits on outstanding indebtedness. These limits for the Project Areas will be combined and increased. Time Limit to Incur Debt The time limit to incur debt in the PCD and the CBD 1976 Original Area will be repealed. The time limit to incur debt in the CBD 2001 Added Area remains the same. Time Limit to Implement Proiects In Tune 2004, PCDC extended the time limits for project activities per SB 1045 in the PCD, the CBD 1976 Original Area and the CBD 2001 Added Area. In addition, the time limit for project activities is proposed to be extended by two years in die CBD 1976 Original Area per SB 1096, Therefore, PCDC must complete all project activities by July 2029 in the PCD, through September 2019 in the CBD 1976 Original Area, and by June 2032 in the CBD 2001 Added Area. This limit is also referred to as the limit for plan effectiveness. Time Limit to Receive Tax Increment and Renav Debt After the time limit for project activities, PCDC can collect tax increment for 10 years in the PCD and the CBD 1976 Original Area; and 15 years in the CBD 2001 Added Area to repay debt. Limit on Amount of Outstandine Bonded Indebtedness The Redevelopment Plan must include a limit on the total amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness secured by tax increment revenue. PCDC intends to merge the limit of outstanding bonded indebtedness for all Project Areas and increase it to $250 million. Limit on Eminent Domain Activity The time limit for eminent domain authority is June 2013 in the CBD. Eminent domain authority has expired in the PCD. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -10 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 2. Using Tax Increment Revenue to Eliminate Blighting Conditions The general purpose of redevelopment is the elimination of blighting conditions. The completion of a redevelopment program results in a project area that is physically enhanced and economically stronger due to the elimination of blighting conditions. Chapter II presents evidence of remaining blighting conditions in the Project Areas. The Redevelopment Program described in Chapter If is specifically designed to stimulate private investment and alleviate physical and economic blighting conditions in the Project Areas. The use of tax increment revenue is the most appropriate means of providing sufficient funding for the Redevelopment Program. 3. Stabilizing and Enhancing the Property Tax Base In many communities, redevelopment projects have led to the stabilization of property tax rolls and tax receipts for taxing entities within project areas. As a result, these communities have avoided declines in tax revenues due to erosion of property values. In most redevelopment project areas, the investment of public redevelopment funds to leverage private investment has resulted in substantial increases in property values over time due to rehabilitation, new construction, and property appreciation. 4. Establishing the Base Year Assessed Value The fust major step in the implementation of a tax increment financing program, establishing the base year assessed value of a project area, occurs at the time of redevelopment plan adoption. The base year assessed value includes the total value of taxable property within a project area's boundaries. The tax roll used is called the base year assessment roll or base year assessed value. Under the Fiscal Merger, the base year values for the PCD, the CBD 1976 Original Area and the CBD 2001 Added Area remain the same. Refer to Table IV -2 for the respective base years and base assessed values. 5. Distribution of Property Taxes During Project Implementation Under the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, all of the entities that levy taxes in the Project Areas will continue to receive all property tax revenues derived from the relevant frozen base. Taxing entities will also continue to receive their existing contractual and statutory pass through payments. In addition, the taxing entities may also receive a portion of the property tax revenues generated from the increases in assessed value over a relevant base year assessed value. Inflation Allocation Pavments For redevelopment projects adopted between January 1985 and December 1993, Section 33676 of the CRL allowed affected taxing entities to elect to receive a portion of the total tax increment revenue generated in a project area in addition to their share of the frozen base of the property taxes under certain circumstances? This is often referred to as the two percent inflation allocation. Inflationary allocation payments are not considered part of the tax increment revenue, and therefore are not counted against the tax increment collection cap. 3 Taxing entities could either elect to receive a portion of tax increment revenue via Section 33676 or alternatively were allowed to enter into a contractual fiscal mereement with a redevelopment agency. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -12 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Contractual Pass Through Pavments Prior to 1994, only taxing entities that had entered into contractual pass through agreements with redevelopment agencies were eligible to receive pass through payments. Agencies were allowed at the time of redevelopment plan adoption to negotiate with taxing entities to establish contractual pass through agreements. Section 33401 of the CRL stipulated that a redevelopment agency could enter into an agreement with an affected taxing entity to pay an amount of money in lieu of taxes to alleviate a fiscal detriment from redevelopment. This contractual pass through amount could not exceed the amount the taxing entity would have otherwise received had the project area not been established. Statutory Pass Through Pavments Assembly Bill 1290, effective January 1, 1994, eliminated the authorization for establishing or amending negotiated contractual pass through agreements and imposed statutorily determined pass through payments to affected taxing entities for plans adopted or amended January 1, 1994 or later. The CRL provides standard formulas for the calculation of pass through payments for plans adopted or amended after 1993. Each entity receives a payment in proportion to its property tax levy in each project at the time of plan adoption or amendment. The pass through payments constitute the State Legislature's determination of the payments necessary to alleviate any financial burden of a redevelopment program to affected taxing entities. CRL Section 33607.5(f)(1)(B) states that statutory pass through payments are the only payments that are required of a redevelopment agency to affected taxing entities during the term of a redevelopment plan. (The calculation of statutory pass through payments are further described in Section F.5.) 6. Tax Increment Financing The Redevelopment Plans enable PCDC to receive tax increment revenues as defined in CRL Section 33670. Therefore, the method of financing commonly referred to as tax increment financing is available to the PCDC for purposes of implementing the Redevelopment Plans. Furthermore, the Fiscal Merger will provide PCDC with greater flexibility to implement the Redevelopment Program projects and activities. If adopted, the proposed Fiscal Merger would result in a combined limit for outstanding bonded indebtedness of $250 million for the two Project Areas. 7. Distribution of Property Taxes after Project Completion When a redevelopment project is completed and loans or other indebtedness have been repaid, all property taxes flow back to the respective taxing entities. Taxing entities benefit from increases in property tax revenues resulting from revitalized and redeveloped project areas. In many communities, such increases are substantial. In fact, over time, taxing entities can recoup revenues following project completion sufficient to make up for the property tax revenues that were allocated to tax increment during the redevelopment implementation period. This recovery would occur because the increases in assessed valuation from revitalization of the project areas are greater as a result of redevelopment than the assessed valuation increases that would have occurred without redevelopment. Thus, payments to the affected taxing entities from a redevelopment project area can exceed the property taxes that the taxing entities would reasonably expect to receive from a slow-growing assessed valuation roll without redevelopment. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -13 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 F. Assumptions Used in Tax Increment Projections The tax increment projections in this report are intended only as estimates based on the best available information as of the date of this report. Actual tax increments may be higher or lower than the projections. Refer to the tables in Appendix D for detailed analysis of potential tax increment revenues for the Redevelopment Project. Base Year Assessed Value The base year for the PCD is FY 1987/88, and the base year assessed value is $331.5 million. The base year for CBD 1976 Original Area is FY 1976/77, and the base year assessed value is $18.8 million. The base year for the CBD 2001 Added Area is FY 2000/01, and the base year assessed value is $48.7 million. 2. Present Value Assumptions The analysis below provides estimates of tax increment revenues in both future value (nominal) dollars and present value (constant) dollars. The purchasing power of nominal dollars declines because of inflation and/or the cost of borrowing. Therefore, it is important to convert the annual amounts to the equivalent value in constant 2006 dollars before making a direct comparison between potential revenues and projected costs. The present value in constant 2006 dollars is calculated by discounting future tax increment revenues by an annual rate of 5.5 percent. This discount rate represents the average cost of borrowing for the City and PCDC. It accounts for the cost of inflation, as well as the cost of borrowing money (e.g., issuing tax allocation bonds), to approximate the present value of future dollars. Most tax increment will be pledged to the issuance of bonds, and a portion of tax increment will likely be used on a pay-as-you-go basis. 3. Growth Assumptions Tax increment revenues are generated from the growth in assessed value above the base year assessed value (incremental assessed value). Tax increment revenues are projected by applying the effective property tax rate, assumed at one percent, to the incremental assessed value. Growth in assessed property values in the Project Areas is based upon the factors below: Annual Inflation Rate The annual inflation rate is assumed at two percent per year for properties that remain in the same ownership. Two percent is the maximum annual increase that is allowed by the California State Constitution as a result of Proposition 13 in the absence of certain events that can trigger a reassessment, such as a sale or construction of new improvement. This two percent inflation factor is applied to the total assessed value. Reassessment Adiustment An annual reassessment adjustment represents the increases in assessed value following property reassessment, which is triggered by: (1) the transfer (sale) of real property, (2) upgrading of real property improvements due to rehabilitation or additions to existing buildings, or (3) the reassessments of new development to market value once construction is completed. The reassessment adjustment for secured property is assumed to be 0.5 percent per year in the Project Areas. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -14 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 New Development Projections for new development in the Project Areas are based on estimates of growth Orat will occur due to new construction and redevelopment of properties in the area. These estimates are based on information provided by PCDC and City staff regarding potential development in both Project Areas, based on a review of pending building permits as well as development proposals. The estimated growth is attributable to both new development on vacant land plus redevelopment of existing residential and commercial properties (including both buildings that are substantially rehabilitated and demolished and rebuild). For new development in the PCD, tax increment projections in this report assume an annual percentage increase above the inflation rate and reassessment adjustment. For the CBD, new development is assumed to add a constant incremental assessed value above the inflation rate and reassessment adjustment. New development growth is assumed at 2.5 percent of the secured assessed value per year between FY 2007/08 and FY 2024/25 in PCD, which represents about $30 million in assessed value growth attributable to new development in FY 2007/08. In the CBD 1976 Original Area, the value of new development is assumed to add $20 million in constant 2006 dollars to the property tax assessment roll each year between FY 2005/06 and FY 2019/20. In CBD 2001 Added Area, the value of new development is assumed to add $10 million in constant 2006 dollars to the property tax assessment roll each year between FY 2005/06 and FY 2019/20. 4. Agency Tax Increment Obligations PCDC must use tax increment revenue to fulfill the following obligations: a. County Fee for Property Tax Administration Sonoma County retains fees for the administration of tax increment revenues. Based on the fees assessed in FY 2003/04 and FY 2004/05, the projections in this Preliminary Report estimate the County administration fee at 1.7 percent of the basic one percent incremental tax revenues for the PCD, the CBD 1976 Original Area and the CBD 2001 Added Area. b. Inflation Allocation Payments The PCD was adopted within the January 1, 1985 and July 30, 1993 time frame authorizing inflation allocation payments. Thus, taxing entities in this Project Area were eligible to elect to receive the two percent inflation allocation instead of negotiating a contractual agreement. According to PCDC and Sonoma County records, the County, Cinnabar, Old Adobe Union, Petaluma Elementary, Petaluma Elementary Unified Failure, Waugh, Petaluma High, Sonoma County Junior College, School Services Administration and Schools Equalization Aid elected to receive the allocation or an amount equivalent to this allocation. C. Contractual Pass Through Payments As discussed in Section E.5 above, the PCD and the CBD 1976 Original Area were adopted prior to the introduction of statutory pass through payments in 1994. PCDC negotiated contractual pass through agreements with some of the affected taxing entities in the PCD. PCDC and taxing entities did not negotiate contractual agreements for the CBD. (Refer to Table IV -3 for a listing of entities with contractual pass through agreements.) Under the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger, taxing entities with existing contractual pass through agreements will continue to receive their contractual agreement payments. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -15 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 d. Statutory Pass through Payments All of the affected taxing entities currently receive statutory payments from the CBD Original and Added Areas. Statutory pass-through payments were triggered in the Original CBD by the 2001 Amendment to extend the time limit on debt incurrence. All affected taxing entities without contractual agreements will begin to receive statutory pass through payments from the PCD during FY 2009/10.4 In the PCD, statutory pass through payments would begin for taxing entities without contractual agreements in the fiscal year following the fiscal year when the time limit for incurring debt would have been reached. Table IV -3 presents PCDC's statutory pass through payment obligation under the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. Section F.5 presents a detailed explanation of the statutory pass through payment calculations. e. Housing Set -Aside for Affordable Housing Program Section 33334.2 of the CRL requires that 20 percent of the gross tax increment revenues generated be used for increasing and/or improving the community's supply of low and moderate income housing. In other words, twenty cents out of each tax increment dollar generated during the life of the Amended Redevelopment Plans must be channeled into the Housing Set -Aside Fund to finance PCDC's affordable housing program. Administrative costs related to the implementation of the Affordable Housing Program are typically paid out of the Housing Set -Aside Fund. £ Agency Administration The FY 2005/06 Non -housing PCDC administrative costs are estimated to be $533,128 for the PCD and $61,337 for the CBD by PCDC, and the projections in this Preliminary Report estimate the Non -Housing Agency administrative costs to increase at annual growth rate of three percent for each Project Area. As noted above, the administrative cost related to the implementation of PCDC's Affordable Housing Program is paid out of PCDC's Housing Set -Aside Fund. g. Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF Obligation) Faced with a budget gap for FY 2003/04, the State enacted legislation, SB 1045, (Chapter 260, Statutes of 2003) requiring all redevelopment agencies receiving tax increment in FY 2001/02 to contribute to the Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund (ERAF) in FY 2003/04. SB 1045 provides that one-half of an Agency's ERAF obligation for all project areas collectively is calculated based on the FY 2001/02 gross tax increment received by PCDC and other half of its ERAF obligation is calculated based on the FY 2001/02 net tax increment revenues after any pass through payments to other taxing entities. The Governor and Legislature enacted SB 1096 (Chapter 211, Statutes of 2004) in an effort to balance the FY 2004/05 and FY 2005/06 state budgets. Further legislation, AB 2115 (Chapter 610, Statutes of 2004), clarifies that the ERAF payments made in both years will be calculated based on the most recent published edition of the State Controller's Annual Report. Thus, the FY 2004/05 payments were based on FY 2002/03 data and the FY 2005/06 payments will be based on FY 2003/04 data. The FY 2004/05 PCDC's ERAF obligation was $918,641. The projections in this report assume PCDC's FY 2005/06 ERAF obligation to be the same as in FY 2004/05. PCDC has the authority to allocate PCDC's ERAF obligation among its individual project areas at its sole discretion. 4 Refer to Section FS for a more detailed description of statutory pass through payments. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -16 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 r� ° 0 �a u z z 0 Z 0 0 E Q2 � o o Q o 0 0 o d 0 o 0 a o Q Q Q o d o 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 L m m z m m.2 z2 m� a. A f^ U aQi A Z '� d z z z 0 o Q o 0 o Q o o 0 0 0 d o Q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 c ° a a o U) cn � c 0 G p rn n0 N U O O O o o O o O¢ o o o 'L o >' z z z z z z z z''� z >' �" �" 5"' z z z N VJ 0 T h U p.i rn 0 rn 0 rn 0 rn 0 rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn� rn rn rn rn rn 'y � 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •° � ° ❑ 'Dp C 'pp E 'pp C 'Op 'Cp 9 'bp E G 'rip'6p C C C .r •M E G ED C 'pp c 'bp C 'bp r '6➢ r '60 W) p N U U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 U c n m 'O U 7 O v aciQ 23 aNi cC G U •� c n Q m R. c c E u t E o .E p Fj U U U wo Q m P, '� 0 m ` .un m m cx7 E m n E w U c U a m c Q ,c m d c c E o c o o q m 'o d E E 0 o o a o E ro o vdi E v 0 u v o a o• o a s rn a; N U M rn U a U ,� v, ? 9 d ° 0. 0. 5. Calculation of Pass Through Payments a. Pass Through Payment Status not Impacted by the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger As described earlier, the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger will not change the pass through obligations in the CBD, because statutory pass through payment obligations already exist for all taxing entities levying property taxes in the CBD. PCDC has been making annual contractual pass through payments based on the formulas as indicated in die agreements and will continue to pay them accordingly after the adoption of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. PCDC has contractual pass through payment obligations in the PCD. b. Statutory Pass Through Payments Triggered by the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger In the PCD, taxing entities currently receive either (1) pass through payments that were negotiated when the Redevelopment Plan was originally adopted or (2) no payment because a pass through was not negotiated or no two percent inflation allocation was elected. Under the CRL, if the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger are adopted, any taxing entities that did not negotiate a contractual pass through agreement at the time of original Redevelopment Plan adoption would be eligible to receive statutory pass through payments if the original debt incurrence limits are repealed. Entities with contractual pass through agreements continue to receive contractual payments. The Plan Amendments will repeal the debt incurrence limits in the PCD and Original CBD. The statutory pass through payments would begin in the fiscal year after the debt incurrence limit would have been reached. The payment would be calculated on the assessed value of the Project Area in the fiscal year of the original debt incurrence limit. The deadline for incurring debt in the PCD is July 18, 2008. Thus, statutory pass through payments would begin in FY 2009/10 for all taxing entities levying property taxes without contractual pass through agreements in the PCD. The deadline for incurring debt in the Original CBD is September 27, 2011. Statutory pass through payments have already begun in the CBD for all taxing entities who levy property taxes in the CBD. Refer to Table IV -3 on the previous page for a summary of the pass through payments under the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger. C. Statutory Pass Through Payments Calculation Starting on January 1, 1994, under AB 1290, when adopting a new project area, adding area to an existing project area, or amending a pre -1994 redevelopment plan to extend or increase a fiscal limit, PCDC must begin to make pass through payments to entities that do not have pre-existing pass through agreements. Such amendments must follow the CRL -mandated procedure described below. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -18 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 The mandated pass through is calculated based on the difference between the assessed value in the particular year for which the pass through is being calculated and the assessed value of the relevant pass through base year. The incremental assessed value is multiplied by the effective property tax rate (assumed at one percent) for each entity, times a mandated set of three tiered pass through rates. Over the life of a redevelopment project, each entity will receive its proportionate share of three tiers of pass through payments: Tier One Twenty percent of the gross tax increment from assessed value growth above the relevant Tier One base year value. In the CBD 2001 Added Area, the Tier One base year is FY 2000/01. In the CBD 1976 Original Area, the Tier One base year is FY 2001/02.' In the PCD, when statutory pass through payments are triggered under the Plan Amendments, the Tier One statutory pass though base year will be FY 2008/09 because that is the year that the debt limit would otherwise have been reached. The City may elect to receive the Tier One pass through, however, it cannot participate in the Tier Two and Tier Three pass through payments. This report assumes that the City will elect to receive its Tier One pass through, although the City has the option to forego it. Tier Two The Tier Two pass through is equal to 16.8 percent of the gross tax increment generated from assessed value growth above the second tier statutory pass through assessed value base. In the CBD, the Tier Two base year is FY 2011/12,6 and pass through payments will begin in FY 2012/13. In the PCD, Tier Two pass through payments would begin in the eleventh year after the original indebtedness limit would have been passed, or FY 2019/20. This Tier Two pass through is added to the Tier One payment and continues through the remaining life of the Redevelopment Plan(s). Tier Three The Tier Three pass through payment is equal to 11.2 percent of the gross tax increment generated from assessed value growth above the Tier Three assessed value base. Tier Three pass through payments would not likely occur in the PCD and Original CBD as the Redevelopment Plans are projected to end before the third tier pass throughs would begin. The CBD Added Area Tier Three base year would be FY 2031/32. This Tier Three pass through is added to the Tier One and Tier Two payments and continues through the remaining life of the Redevelopment Plan. G. Tax Increment Projections 1. Incremental Tax Revenues Table IV -4 summarizes the projected County property tax administration fee, State ERAF payments and tax increment revenues available for pass through payments and the Redevelopment Program in nominal (future) and constant FY 2005/06 (present value) dollars. Figure fV-I illustrates the generation of future tax revenues over the life of the Redevelopment Plans. The tables in Appendix D provide detailed tax increment projections for the Project Areas. e FY 2001/02 is the Tier One base year for the CBD Original Area as statutory pass-through payments were triggered by the 2001 Amendment to extend the time limit on debt incurrence. 6 The Tier Two base year is the 10'^ year in which an agency receives tax increment revenue, typically 10 years after the Tier One base year. In the CBD 2001 Added Area, the Agency did not actually receive tax increment until FY 2002/03 and therefore the Tier Two base year is FY 2011/12. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -I9 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table IV -4 Summary of Tax Increment Over the Life of the Project From FY 2005/06 Through End of Project Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - PCD and CBD (Rounded Nearest $100,000) Incremental Property Tax Revenues Less: Unilateral 2% Election Less: County Property Tax Administration Net Taxes Remitted to Agency Less: Pass -Through Payments to Taxing Entities Less: State ERAF Payments Tax Increment for Housing and Non -Housing Projects Less: 20% Set -Aside for Affordable Housing Tax Increment Available for Non -Housing Projects Less: Redevelopment Administration Net Available for Non -Housing Projects Nominal Dollars $997,900,000 $46,300,000 $17.000.000 $934,700,000 $329,200,000 5900.000 $604,500,000 $190300.000 Constant 2006 Dollars' $410,900,000 $18,800,000 $7000.000 $385,100,000 $127,900,000 900.000 $256,300,000 $78,400.000 $414,200,000 $177,900,000 $30.200.000 $13,200,000 $384,000,000 $164,700,000 a. Equal to net present value of future revenue stream discounted at 5.5% per year, assuming PCDC would issue bonds during the life of the project. Note: Amounts may not precisely match, due to rounding. Source: Scifel Consulting Inc.; Petaluma Community Development Commission. Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger N-20 April 2006 \\kn ) fw f/ "® (\ \ ){ a \/ ~ q» � B/ )\ (J // h \ ) ( }f w \ ) � ( }f )§ � a: !� E \ \� \\ \} �� \\ \} /) }{ §§ 2. Cumulative Tax Increment Collection The PCD's fiscal limit for tax increment collection is $800 million. It is projected to reach the limit, and will thus generate approximately $719.8 million in additional incremental tax revenues in nominal dollars over the remaining time period for collecting tax increment' The CBD is projected to generate approximately $230.9 million in incremental tax revenues in nominal dollars over the remaining time periods for collecting tax increment. (Refer to Appendix D for the tax increment projections for both the PCD and CBD.) H. Financial Feasibility of the Redevelopment Program This section demonstrates why tax increment revenues made possible through the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger will be a necessary part of the overall financing program to eliminate blighting conditions in the Project Areas and why, with such tax increment revenue, PCDC has a feasible plan for financing the Redevelopment Program to eliminate such blight. Together with other public and private revenue sources, tax increment revenues will be a critical funding component in helping the City and PCDC to meet the costs required to implement the Redevelopment Program. To evaluate the feasibility of the Redevelopment Program, the following analysis compares its estimated costs and projected lax increment related funding sources. As previously shown in Table N -I, the net cost to PCDC to complete the Redevelopment Program (excluding PCDC's administrative costs) is estimated to be $243.1 million in constant 2006 dollars. Over the life of the Plans, PCDC is projected to receive about $256.3 million (in constant 2006 dollars) in tax increment revenue for PCDC's Redevelopment Program, and PCDC's administrative costs for non -housing activities are projected to be approximately $13.2 million in constant 2006 dollars. PCDC is expected to have sufficient funds to support its Redevelopment Program, but no surplus is budgeted, as shown in Table N-5. Although the estimated project costs and projected revenues will vary over time from those presented in this chapter, it is reasonable to conclude that the Redevelopment Program will be financially feasible over the remaining life of the Redevelopment Plans. PCDC will continue to adopt an annual budget and adopt an Implementation Plan every five years to develop a balanced financial approach to funding the specific action items in the Redevelopment Program. PCDC will assure through its annual budget process that the Redevelopment Projects are financially feasible throughout the remaining life of each. r Estimate does not include PCDC's FY 2005/06 State ERAF obligation payments and inflation allocation payments throughout the remaining, the time period for tax increment collection because they do not count against the tax increment collection can. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -22 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table IV -5 Comparison of Estimated Tax Increment Revenues and Agency Funding Requirements (Constant 2006 dollars) Tax Increment Available for Projects' $256.3 million Less: PCDC Non -Housing Program $164.7 million Less: Projected Administration Expense for $13.2 million Non -Housing Activities Less: Agency Affordable Housing Program" $78.4 million Funding Surplus None Budgeted a. Present value of future tax increment revenues projected to be available for implementation of the Redevelopment Program (includes housing, non -housing and non -housing administration costs). See Appendix D for details. b. See Tables III -2 and IV -1. Source: Petaluma Community Development Commission. L Necessity of Tax Increment Financing and Fiscal Merger This section summarizes the extent of physical and economic blighting conditions in the PCD and CBD, and explains why private enterprise and governmental action, working alone or together, cannot reasonably be expected to reverse the blighting conditions without redevelopment. 1. Extent of Physical and Economic Blighting Conditions The physical and economic blighting conditions in the PCD and CBD are so prevalent and substantial that they cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed without redevelopment assistance. The documentation of physical and economic blighting conditions in Chapter 11, and the photographs contained in Appendix B demonstrate that substantial blight is prevalent. A substantial number of unsafe and/or unhealthy buildings are located within the Project Areas as shown in the photographs in Appendix B. Several factors inhibit the proper use of buildings and lots, such as earthquake hazards and poor soil conditions, limited accessibility to and within certain areas, and flooding. Incompatible uses and substandard lots in multiple ownership are problematic at several locations. Also, inadequate public facilities and infrastructure including sidewalk, curbing and street deficiencies, and water, sewer and storm drainage deficiencies hinder portions of the Project Areas. Several adverse economic conditions cause a reduction or lack of proper use of the Project Areas, including impaired investments such as the presence of potentially hazardous or toxic materials and the high cost of building rehabilitation. Other factors include economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots, including vacant and underutilized lots and buildings, and high vacancy rates. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -23 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 These conditions are a hindrance to the area that cannot be reversed or alleviated without the continued assistance of PCDC through the authority of the CRL. These blighting conditions have caused a reduction of, or lack of, proper utilization in the Project Areas and constitute a serious physical and economic burden on the community, which cannot be reversed or alleviated without the assistance of PCDC tlrrough the authority of the CRL. 2. Significant Burden on the Community Chapter If documented that blighting conditions have become a burden on the community and that portions of Project Areas are not being used to the same potential as properties in other parts of the City. The reduction, or lack, of proper utilization constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the community in at least the following respects: • Deprives residents of Petaluma and surrounding areas of employment opportunities. Prevents adequate supply of affordable and other housing. Deprives property and business owners of a competitive return on their investments. Hinders the enhancement of the physical environment. Prevents proper usefulness and development of land. Deprives the City, the County, the education districts, and other affected taxing entities of an expanding tax base. • Hinders the development of a stronger economic base for the community. 3. Limitations of Private Enterprise The Redevelopment Program to alleviate blighting conditions is not financially feasible for the private sector acting alone. Without redevelopment, many of the program costs would have to be borne solely by the private sector. This chapter and Appendix C presents a discussion of possible sources of private sector funds for redevelopment. By themselves, these sources would not be able to provide the resources necessary to eliminate blighting conditions and revitalize the area. The private sector's ability to alleviate blight is limited by the following factors: • The remediation of parcels contaminated with toxic of hazardous waste is costly and a financial disincentive to reinvestment or development. • Inadequate public facilities and infrastructure deficiencies hinder private sector development. 4. Inability of Private Enterprise or Government to Alleviate Blight Alleviating blighting conditions is not feasible by governmental action alone because governmental action is limited by the lack of a reliable flow of federal, state, or local financial resources available to fund a comprehensive revitalization program, as discussed earlier. Redevelopment assistance in the form of tax increment revenue is the last -resort gap filler that is essential to fund the alleviation of blighting conditions and an effective revitalization effort for the PCD and CBD. As described earlier and in Appendix C, all other feasible sources of non -tax increment revenue will be applied toward Redevelopment Program costs. However, the costs of the Redevelopment Program to alleviate blighting conditions are significant, and the projects and activities of the Redevelopment Program could not be undertaken without redevelopment assistance. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -24 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 5. Why Tax Increment Financing is Necessary Tax increment financing is a necessary financing tool, which will be used to support the Redevelopment Program costs. As discussed in Chapter III, the costs to alleviate documented blighting conditions substantially exceed available funding from public and private sources. Tax increment financing is the only source available to fill the substantial gap between the costs of the Redevelopment Program and other public and private revenue sources. This chapter demonstrates the general economic feasibility of the Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger pursuant to Section 33670, as required by the CRL. This chapter and Chapter III demonstrate that the proposed Plan Amendments are necessary to eliminate documented blight in the Project Areas. With the Fiscal Merger, PCDC would be able to pool tax increment funds of separate Project Areas to focus on the needs of a particular area. This would enable PCDC to accelerate implementation of redevelopment activities and, in turn, catalyze development, renovation, and rehabilitation that would generate tax increment revenue at a faster rate than would be expected without the Fiscal Merger and Plan Amendments. In turn with the combination of tax increment revenue, PCDC would also have greater collective bonding capacity than in each Project Area without the Fiscal Merger. Neither the private sector alone, the public sector alone, nor the private and public sectors working together without redevelopment assistance can financially support the costs of the redevelopment efforts in the Project Areas. Because these projects and activities are critical to the revitalization of the PCD and CBD, tax increment financing is needed to assist in funding these projects. Tax increment financing will be the critical funding source that PCDC will use to implement redevelopment in the Project Areas. Without redevelopment assistance, neither the private nor public sectors working independently can fmancially support the substantial costs of the proposed Redevelopment Program. Because these projects and activities are critical to the revitalization of the Project Areas, tax increment financing will continue to be a critical funding source enabling PCDC to implement the Redevelopment Program. Petaluma Community Development Commission IV -25 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendices Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Petaluma Community Development Commission Appendix A. Sources Appendix B. Photographic Documentation of Existing Conditions Appendix C. Potential Funding Sources Appendix D. Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix A Sources Sources Information presented in the Preliminary Report was compiled from the following sources: • ABAG Earthquake Program, Earthquake Shaking Scenario on the Rodgers Creek Fault, Magnitude 7.0, April 2004. • Administrative Draft Report, Water System Master Plan for the City of Petaluma, Black & Veatch Corporation, July 2003. Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan for the Central Business District Redevelopment Project, PCDC, City of Petaluma, June 4, 2001. • California State Water Resource Control Board, Geotracker, January 2005 • Central Business District Redevelopment Plan, PCDC, October 27, 1976. • City of Petaluma 1999-2006 Housing Element, October 2004. • City of Petaluma Floodplain Management Plan, Schaff and Wheeler, October 2001. • City of Petaluma General Plan, 1987-2005. • Central Petaluma Specific Plan, City of Petaluma, June 2, 2003. • Department of Toxic Substances Control, Covenant to Restrict Use of Property Environmental Restriction, Capped Portion of 10006 Lakeville Highway, Petaluma, California, A.P. No. 5-060-17,1998. • Department of Toxic and Substance Control, Site Cleanup — Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Database, Profile Report, ID: 49420003—McPhail's Inc., March 2005. • Department of Toxic and Substance Control, Site Cleanup — Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Database, Profile Report, ID: 49490001 — PG&E — Petaluma #1., March 2005. • Department of Toxic and Substance Control, Site Cleanup — Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Database, Profile Report, ID: 49500014 — California Crush Auto Recycling, March 2005. • Department of Toxic and Substance Control, Site Cleanup — Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse Program Database, Profile Report, ID: 49070001— Sonoma -Marin Fairgrounds, March 2005. • Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Report for the City of Petaluma, California, August 2003. • Draft Central Petaluma Specific Plan, City of Petaluma, 1999. • Draft Environmental Impact Report, Petaluma General Plan, July 25, 1986. • Earthquake Probabilities in the San Francisco Bay Region: 2002-2031, U.S. Geological Survey Open -File Report 03-214. • Environmental Impact Report, PCDC, 1988. • Final Environmental Impact Report for the Petaluma Community Development Project, PCDC, 1988. • Images of America: Petaluma, Simone Wilson, 2001. • Master Facilities Plan for the City of Petaluma, California, Revenue and Cost Specialists, LLC, August 2003. • Mid -Term Review Of The PCD Five -Year Implementation Plan (FY 2001-02 through FY 2006-07), PCDC, April 19, 2004. Petaluma Community Development Commission A-1 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 • Ordinance No. 1221 N.C.S., An Ordinance Approving and Adopting the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Central Business District Redevelopment Project, City of Petaluma, September 27, 1976. • Ordinance No. 1725 N.C.S., An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Petaluma, California, Approving and Adopting the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Community Development Project, City of Petaluma, August 17, 1988. • Ordinance No. 1882 N.C.S., An Ordinance of the City of Petaluma Adding Section 17.34 to the Petaluma Municipal Code Pertaining to the Seismic Strengthening of Unreinforced Masonry Buildings, City of Petaluma, April 1992. • Ordinance No. 1972 N.C.S., An Ordinance Establishing and Amending Certain Time Limitations with Respect to the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Community Redevelopment Project, City of Petaluma, December 21, 1994. • Ordinance No. 1973, An Ordinance Establishing and Amending Certain Time Limitations with Respect to the Redevelopment Plan for the Central Business District Redevelopment Project, City of Petaluma, December 21, 1994. • Ordinance No. 2092, An Ordinance of the City of Petaluma Amending Certain Limitations with Respect to the Redevelopment Plan for the Central Business District Redevelopment Project, City of Petaluma, July 21, 1999. • Ordinance No. 2100 An Ordinance Amending the PCD Plan, City of Petaluma, April 17, 2000. • Ordinance No. 2116 N.C.S., An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Petaluma, Approving and Adopting the Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the Central Business District Redevelopment Project, City of Petaluma, July 18, 2001. • Ordinance No. 2183 N.C.S., An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Petaluma, July 7, 2004. • Ordinance No. 2184 N.C.S., An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Petaluma, July 7, 2004. • Ordinance No. 2194 N.C.S., An Ordinance of the Council of the City of Petaluma Amending Section 17.20.070 of the Petaluma Municipal Code Requiring Installation of Automatic Fire Sprinklers in Pre -Existing Building in the Historic Downtown Business District, City of Petaluma, November 4, 2004. • Petaluma General Plan 2025: Existing Conditions, Opportunities and Challenges Report, Dyett & Bhatia, October 2002. • Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Community Development Project, PCDC, July 18, 1988. • Report of the City Council of the City of Petaluma, Accompanying the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Community Development Project, PCDC, June 1998, • Report to Council on the Central Business District Redevelopment Plan Amendment, PCDC, April 2001. • Report to Council on the Proposed Amendment to the Petaluma Community Development Project Redevelopment Plan, PCDC, February 2000. • Report to the Petaluma City Council on the Redevelopment Plan, Petaluma Central Business District Redevelopment Project, Petaluma Community Development Commission, May 1976. • State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Bay Region, Summary Report for Spills, Leaks, Investigations, and Cleanups (SLIC) Program, November 29, 2000. • Understanding How and Why The River Floods, Jane Lott, Petaluma Argus -Courier, May 19, 2004. • U.S. Geological Survey, Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities. Petaluma Community Development Commission A-2 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 City of Petaluma Chris Albertson, Fire Department Chief Michael Ban, Interim Director of Water Resources and Conservation Mike Bierman, City Manager Steven Carmichael, Director of Finance Steve Castaldo, Project Manager Joyce Clark, Capital Improvements Division Manager True Cooper, GIS Manager Scott Duivan, Associate Planner Dean Eckerson, Engineering Manager Bonnie Gabler, Housing Administrator Shelly Kappel, Economic Development & Redevelopment Vincent Marengo, Director of Public Works Mike Moore, Community Development Director Evelyn Onderdonk, Project Manager, Economic Development and Redevelopment Cinde Rubaloff, Finance Department David Sears, Petaluma Police Department Captain Butch Smith, Assistant in Civil Engineering Craig Spaulding, City Engineer Jane Thompson, Code Violations Coordinator Pamela Tuft, General Plan Manager George White, Deputy Director of Community Development County of Sonoma Pamela Johnston, Deputy County Auditor Paula Mingram, Tax Accounting Manager Industrial/Office/Retail Brokers Karren Bell -Newman, Re/Max Marina Trevor Buck, Meridian Commercial Emily McGranaghan, Keegan & Coppin Vin Smith, Basin Street Properties Dave Walwyn, Orion Paul White, Re/Max Marina Other Organizations and Persons Peter A. Dellavalle, Raven Research Roberta Mundie, Principal, Mundie and Associates Andrew Nicholson, Army Corps of Engineers Stephanie Ontiveros, MBIA Muni Services Jerry Peeler, MBIA Muni Services Andy Rodgers, Brownfield Consultant The Preliminmy Report was prepared by the Petaluma Conmm117ity Development Commission in association with Seifel Consulting Inc. Petaluma Community Development Commission A-3 Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix B Photographic Documentation of Existing Conditions Appendix B Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION 2005 Prepared by Petaluma Community Development Commission Seifel Consulting Inc. Introduction Appendix B provides photographs that illustrate existing conditions within the boundaries of the CBD and the PCD.' The majority of the photographs were taken by Seifel Consulting Inc, from January 2005 to April 2005. Photographs flooding conditions, found at the end of each Project Area section, were taken by City staff in December 2005. Photos are representative of the blighting conditions observed during that time. Conditions Illustrated in the Photographs The photographs illustrate a wide variety of conditions present in the areas. Many of the photographs document adverse conditions that may be used to support a finding that the Project Areas are blighted and in need of redevelopment. Conditions illustrated in the photographs include, but are not limited to: Dilapidated and Deteriorated Buildings (CRL Section 33031(a)(1)) A significant number of buildings in the CBD and PCD are dilapidated or deteriorated. Deficiencies shown in the photographs include: unsafe and unhealthy residences, deteriorated roofing, extensive deferred maintenance, broken windows, rust, peeling paint, and alignment problems. Factors that bilribit Proper Use of Buildings or Lots (CRL Section 33031(a)(2)) The CBD and PCD are subject to flooding during periods of heavy rain. Extensive flooding occurred in both the CBD and PCD in December 2005. Photographs of flood damage to businesses, residences and infrastructure are contained in the appendix. Vacant and Underutilised Lots (CRL Section 33031(a)(2), 33031(6)(2)) The photographs document the presence of vacant and underutilized buildings and lots throughout the CBD and PCD. Many vacant and underutilized lots contain illegally dumped garbage and/or standing water. Inactive rail lines are also present in the areas. Vacant atd Abandoned Buildings (CRL Sectio: 33031(a)(2), 33031(b)(2)) Numerous vacant buildings are present in the CBD and PCD, including vacant storefronts in the CBD and vacant commercial space for lease in the PCD. Some buildings have boarded windows and/or security fencing. Vacant buildings are often evidence of economic indicators of distressed buildings or lots. Inadequate Public Improvements (CRL Section 33031(a)(2), 33030(c)2) Photographs in the appendix also show a number of public improvement deficiencies. These include informal and deteriorated curbing, uneven and deteriorated pavement surfaces, lack of sidewalks and unimproved drainage. These conditions contribute to blight and inhibit the proper use of buildings or lots. Organization Figure B-1 indicates the approximate location of the photographs in CBD. Figure B-2 indicates the approximate location of the photographs in the PCD. The photographs, organized by geographic area within each Project Area, are presented on the pages following the maps. ' The conditions identified in the captions for the photographs are based upon an exterior field inspection. The photographs are representative of conditions that are obvious and may be, to one degree or another, hazardous, potentially hazardous, unsafe or unhealthy. In some cases, confirmation of the actual extent of such conditions in specific buildings would necessitate an interior inspection that was not performed. The existence of inadequate public improvements is no longer a stand alone blight factor. However, CRL Section 33030(c) allows the existence of public improvements, parking facilities or utilities to be considered when it can be demonstrated that they contribute to blight Wilk I WF I z 0 Z 0 Y 1 5.". 0 u M -75 A X if 1 by O❑ oo E E 0 u 0 1. CBD: 833 Petaluma Boulevard South: Extensively deteriorated structure, deteriorated paint, roof and siding, missing gutters and downspouts. 2. CBD: 844 Petaluma Boulevard South: Deteriorated, vacant commercial building for lease, deteriorated paint, siding and roof, misalignment, security bars, lack of parking. Petaluma Community Development Commission Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 R141 3. CBD: 740 1/2 Petaluma Boulevard South: Extensively deteriorated residence with alignment problems, deteriorated siding and paint. 4. CBD: 600 Petaluma Boulevard South: Deteriorated masonry building, deteriorated paint, window, and awnings, apparently vacant. Petaluma Community Development Commission 2 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 5. CBD: Mountain View Avenue and Petaluma Boulevard South: Deteriorated structure, deteriorated roof, deferred maintenance, informal construction. 6. CBD: Mountain View Avenue and Petaluma Boulevard South: Vacant commercial building for lease, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 3 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 deferred maintenance, deteriorated siding, windows, eves and paint, external piping, unpaved driveway. deteriorated siding, outdoor storage. Petaluma Community Development Commission 4 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 9. CBD: 2nd Street and H Street, SE: Deteriorated residence, deferred maintenance, sagging roof, deteriorated siding and gutters, unpaved driveway, lack of sidewalk and curb. awning, porch alignment problems. Petaluma Community Development Commission Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 structure, sagging roof, deteriorated siding, paint, eves and gutters, boarded windows, graffiti, overgrown vegetation. 12. CBD: 1" Street and H Street: Standing water, poor drainage, lack of sidewalk, inactive, deteriorated railroad tracks. Petaluma Community Development Commission 6 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 13. CBD: P` Street and H Street: Deteriorated structure, illegal dumping, graffiti, overgrown vegetation. 14. CBD: H Street and the River Bank: Deteriorated fence, graffiti, trash, prone to flooding, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 7 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 15. CSD: 1" Street and H Street: Standing water, poor drainage, lack of sidewalk, overgrown vegetation lo. �DV: JZr I 31reeL: veWrIuraieu snuciure, amenorarea roor, eves, siding, paint and windows, rust, lack of parking, street deficiencies. Petaluma Community Development Commission 8 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 CBD: paint. 18. CBD: I" Street between F Street and G Street, SE: Inactive, deteriorated railroad tracks, deteriorated pavement. Petaluma Community Development Commission 9 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 15,. LnL: 1 aueet ana n bueet, iv w: nxtensiveiy oetenoratea structure, deferred maintenance, deteriorated siding, door and paint, graffiti, lack of sidewalks and clubs, deteriorated pavement. standing water, poor drainage, lack of sidewalk, deteriorated street. Petaluma Community Development Commission 10 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 CBD: 1" Street between E Street and F Street: Vacant and deteriorated warehouse building, unsafe and unhealthy structure, deteriorated walls, roof and pavement, graffiti, overgrown vegetation. standing water, poor drainage, overgrown vegetation Petaluma Community Development Commission 11 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 23. CBD: 150 H Street: Dilapidated, unsafe, unhealthy structure, misalignment, deteriorated roof, walls and paint, informal construction, boarded windows, lack of sidewalk, trash accumulation. 2.4. t.nL: n Lamm ana r nuc eu Letenormea partrauy rermorcea masonry building, deteriorated fence, lack of sidewalks. Petaluma Community Development Commission 12 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 alignment problems, overgrown vegetation. 26. CBD: Petaluma Boulevard South: Deteriorated retail buildings, deteriorated paint and awnings, lack of parking. Petaluma Community Development Commission 13 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 27. CBD: D Street and Petaluma Boulevard South: Vacant and underutilized land, former gas station, potential hazardous material contamination. 28. CBD: 260 Water Street: Deteriorated building, deteriorated metal siding and paint. Petaluma Community Development Commission 14 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 29. CBD: 250 Water Street: Deteriorated building, deteriorated metal siding and windows, rust. 30. CBD: 218 Water Street (Rear): Extensively deteriorated structures, deteriorated walls, paint, windows and doors, deferred maintenance, alignment problems, external piping. Petaluma Community Development Commission 15 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 deteriorated masonry, overgrown vegetation, deteriorated fence and pavement. �- -..u. „ay— aucec uenveen uopetand Street and Washington Street: Extensively deteriorated warehouse building, deteriorated siding, windows and paint, deferred maintenance. Petaluma Community Development Commission 16 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 33. CBD: Water Street between Washington Street and Western Avenue: Partially reinforced masonry building, deteriorated masonry, paint and awning, graffiti. r 34. CBD: Water Street between Washington Street and Western Avenue (Detail): Partially reinforced masonry building, deteriorated paint, masonry and fence. Petaluma Community Development Commission 17 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 35. CBD: Water Street between Washington Street and Westem Avenue (Detail): Large cracks in masonry wall, deteriorated paint. (Detail): Deteriorated masonry wall and paint, external wiring, broken piping. Petaluma Community Development Commission 18 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 37. CBD: Water Street between Washington Street and Western Avenue (Detail): Deteriorated masonry wall and paint. 38. CBD: Water Street between Washington Street and Western Avenue: Deteriorated street pavement, inactive railroad tracks, lack of sidewalks and curbs. Petaluma Community Development Commission 19 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 39. CBD: Water Street between Washington Street and Western Avenue: Partially reinforced masonry building (rear), deteriorated masonry, windows and door, boarded windows, graffiti, extensively deteriorated metal coverings. 40. CBD: 120 Petaluma Boulevard South (rear): deteriorated masonry, mix of masonry, concrete and stone construction. Petaluma Community Development Commission 20 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 41. CBD: 110A Petaluma Boulevard South (rear): Deteriorated commercial building, sagging roof, deteriorated siding, paint and doors, graffiti, deteriorated street pavement. 42. CBD: 110A Petaluma Boulevard South (Detail): Extensively deteriorated metal siding, deteriorated paint and signage, graffiti. Petaluma Community Development Commission 21 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 (i 43. CBD: Water Street and Western Avenue, NE: Deteriorated building, deteriorated walls and paint, mold, sand bags for flood prevention. 44. CBD: Water Street and Western Avenue, NE (Detail): Deteriorated porch, informal wiring, deteriorated foundation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 22 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 LL t .f m (i 43. CBD: Water Street and Western Avenue, NE: Deteriorated building, deteriorated walls and paint, mold, sand bags for flood prevention. 44. CBD: Water Street and Western Avenue, NE (Detail): Deteriorated porch, informal wiring, deteriorated foundation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 22 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 45. CBD: Petaluma Boulevard South at Western Avenue: Underutilized lot used for parking. 46. CBD: Petaluma Boulevard South at Western Avenue: Deteriorated mucinforced masonry wall separating two underutilized parcels used for parking. Petaluma Community Development Commission 23 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 47. CBD: Kentucky Street between Western Avenue and B Street: Partially reinforced masonry building. 48. CBD: Washington Street and Kentucky Street, NE: Aging and deteriorated concrete building. Petaluma Community Development Commission 24 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 49. CBD: Kentucky Street between Westem Avenue and B Street: Partially reinforced masonry building, graffiti. 50. CBD: Petaluma Boulevard North between Western Street and B Street: Vacant and underutilized storefronts. Petaluma Community Development Commission 25 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 mold. 52. CBD: Petaluma Community Development Commission 26 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 53. CBD: 2"" Street and B Street, NW: Inactive, unsafe and dilapidated train trestle, deteriorated supports, water damage. 54. CBD: 2"d Street and B Street, NW: Unsafe and dilapidated trestle, inactive railroad tracks, overgrown vegetation, deteriorated supports. Petaluma Community Development Commission 27 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 CAI 55. CBD: Water Street between Washington Street and Western Avenue: Inactive, extensively deteriorated railroad crossing along the Petaluma River, unsafe and unhealthy, currently closed to pedestrians or vehicles, deteriorated wood pilings. 56. CBD: Washington Street: Unsafe wiring, broken window, Petaluma Community Development Commission 28 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 57. CBD: American Alley, between Western Avenue and Washington Street (Detail): Deteriorated wall. Petaluma Community Development Commission 29 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 59. CBD: American Alley, between Western Avenue and Washington Street (Detail): Deteriorated wall, cracks in masonry. 60. CBD: American Alley, between Western Avenue and Washington Street: Deteriorated structure, deteriorated walls, missing bricks and cracks in masonry, graffiti. Petaluma Community Development Commission 30 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 61. CBD: American Alley, between Western Avenue and Washington Street (Detail): Deteriorated wall, large crack in masonry, external piping. 62. CBD: Washington Street and Kentucky Street: Vacant storefront for lease. Petaluma Community Development Commission 31 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 63. CBD: Washington Street and Kentucky Street (Detail): Large crack in wall. 64. CBD: Kentucky Street, between Washington Street and Western Avenue: Vacant storefront for lease. Petaluma Community Development Commission 32 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 65. CBD: Kentucky Street, between Washington Street and Western Avenue: Partially vacant commercial building for lease. 66. CBD: 140 Petaluma Boulevard North: Vacant and underutilized commercial building, deteriorated paint. Petaluma Community Development Commission 33 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 67. CBD: Court Street and Washington Street: Extensively deteriorated metal building and shed, deteriorated roof and eves, damaged siding, deteriorated paint, rust. 68. CBD: Court Street and Washington Street: Vacant and underutilized lot, illegal dumping. Petaluma Community Development Commission 34 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 69. CBD: 128 Liberty Street: Vacant and underutilized commercial building for lease. 70. CBD: Liberty Street and Western Avenue: Vacant and underutilized commercial building for lease. Petaluma Community Development Commission 35 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 71. CBD: East D Street and Copeland Street NW: Vacant and underutilized lot. 72. CBD: East D Street and Copeland Street NW: Lack of curbs and sidewalks, deteriorated street pavement, standing water, poor drainage. Petaluma Community Development Commission 36 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 73. CBD: Washington Street Bridge and the Petaluma River, looking Southwesterly: Historic downtown within 2 -feet of flooding, flooding on new affordable housing project property. Petaluma Community Development Commission 37 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 75. CBD: Petaluma River and East Washington Street: Debris in fencing due to flooding. 76. PCD: Petaluma Boulevard South at Highway 101 Petaluma Boulevard South Exit: Vacant and underutilized land, standing water, poor drainage, unpaved roadway. Petaluma Community Development Commission 38 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 77. PCD: 1485 Petaluma Boulevard South: Vacant and underutilized land, deteriorated pavement and fence. 78. PCD: 2543 Petaluma Boulevard South: Dilapidated overhang, mold, rusted and deteriorated shed, standing water, poor drainage. Petaluma Community Development Commission 39 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 79. PCD: 2645 Petaluma Boulevard South: Deteriorated structure, deteriorated roof and walls, informal construction, deteriorated electrical wiring, mold. 90. PCD: 2645 Petaluma Boulevard South: Partially vacant building, deteriorated roof, paint and eves, deteriorated wiring. Petaluma Community Development Commission 40 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 81. PCD: 2645 Petaluma Boulevard South (Detail): Dilapidated roof, deteriorated wiring. 82. PCD: 2645 Petaluma Boulevard South: Inactive railroad tracks, underutilized land, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 41 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 83. 2645 Petaluma Boulevard South: Underutilized parking lot, deteriorated pavement. 84. PCD: Francisco Boulevard and Petaluma Boulevard South: Undemtilized land, outdoor storage, standing water, poor drainage, lack of infrastructure, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 42 Photograph.Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 87. PCD: 2543 Petaluma Boulevard South: Underutilized recycling center, outdoor industrial storage, deteriorated pavement. South Exit: Vacant and underutilized land, lack of infrastructure, overgrown. Petaluma Community Development Commission 44 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 pavement. 90. PCD: 1485 Petaluma Boulevard South: Deteriorated structure, misalignment of structure, deteriorated roof, siding and paint, broken windows. Petaluma Community Development Commission 45 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 91. PCD: 1477 Petaluma Boulevard South: Underutilized land, outdoor industrial storage area abutting residential, possible incompatible use. 92. PCD: 1 Rovina Lane: Outdoor storage, abandoned and deteriorated vehicles, lack of infrastructure, deteriorated pavement. Petaluma Community Development Commission 46 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 93. PCD: 1 Rovina Lane: Outdoor storage, deteriorated and dilapidated structure, mold, lack of infrastructure. 94. PCD: 2 Rovina Lane: Vacant and boarded building, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 47 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 95. PCD: Rovina Lane and Petaluma Boulevard South (front): Abandoned, unsafe and unhealthy vacant building, dilapidated structure, dilapidated roof, lack of foundation, deteriorated paint, mold, overgrown vegetation. 96. PCD: Rovina Lane and Petaluma Boulevard South (side): Abandoned, unsafe and unhealthy vacant building, dilapidated structure, dilapidated roof, informal construction, boarded window, deteriorated paint, mold, overgrown vegetation, deteriorated fence. Petaluma Community Development Commission 48 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 97. PCD: 1280 Petaluma Boulevard South: Deteriorated shed, rust, outdoor storage, boarded windows. 98. PCD: 1100 Petaluma Boulevard South: Standing water, poor drainage. Petaluma Community Development Commission 49 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 99. PCD: Petaluma Boulevard South near Rovina Lane: Deteriorated and dilapidated structure, dilapidated walls, informal construction, deteriorated doorway, graffiti, overgrown vegetation. 100. PCD: 892 Lakeville Street: Deteriorated fence and pavement, abandoned and inoperable vehicle. Petaluma Community Development Commission 50 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 101. PCD: Lakeville Street near Lindberg Lane: Vacant and underutilized land, overgrown vegetation. 102. PCD: 1051A Lakeville Street: Deteriorated structure, deferred maintenance, outdoor storage, deteriorated pavement. Petaluma Community Development Commission 51 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 103. PCD: 450 Erwin Street: Deteriorated partially reinforced masonry building, broken and deteriorated windows and paint. 104. PCD: 450 Erwin Street (Detail): Extensively deteriorated masonry wall and windows, broken windows. Petaluma Community Development Commission 52 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 105. PCD: 450 Erwin Street (Detail): Large cracks in concrete steps, overgrown vegetation, deteriorated pavement and curb, inaccessible sidewalk. 106. PCD: Erwin Street at Jefferson Street: Deteriorated street pavement, lack of curbs and sidewalks, standing water, poor drainage. Petaluma Community Development Commission 53 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 building, deteriorated walls, paint and windows, overgrown vegetation. 108. PCD: 416 East D Street: Deteriorated commercial building, deteriorated siding and paint. Petaluma Community Development Commission 54 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 109. PCD: Hawthorne Court at Magnolia Avenue: Extensively deteriorated residence, deteriorated siding, paint, gutters and downspouts, boarded and deteriorated windows, outdoor storage. 110. PCD: Hawthorne Court at Magnolia Avenue: Deteriorated residences, deteriorated siding, paint and windows, deferred maintenance, outdoor storage, lack of curbs and sidewalks, deteriorated street pavement. Petaluma Community Development Commission 55 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 111. PCD: 42 Shasta Avenue: Underutilized lot, deteriorated fence, lack of curbs and sidewalk, deteriorated street with potholes, outdoor industrial storage, inactive vehicle. 112. PCD: 31 Shasta Avenue: Apparently vacant, extensively deteriorated structures, deteriorated siding and paint, boarded windows. Petaluma Community Development Commission 56 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 apparently vacant residence, unsafe and unhealthy, incomplete and informal construction, missing foundation, misalignment, deteriorated siding, roof and paint, boarded windows and doors, overgrown vegetation, deteriorated pavement. 114. PCD: Shasta Avenue and Petaluma Boulevard South: Deteriorated residence, boarded window with security bars, overgrown vegetation, deteriorated fence. Petaluma Community Development Commission 57 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 115. PCD: Shasta Avenue and Petaluma Boulevard South: Dilapidated residence, informal construction, alignment problems, unsafe and unhealthy. 116. PCD: Shasta Avenue and Petaluma Boulevard South: Deteriorated residence, deteriorated paint and siding, lack of sidewalks and curbs. Petaluma Community Development Commission 58 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 PCD: Copeland and East D Street: Agriculture mill, extensive] deteriorated building, deteriorated roof, eves, siding, paint and windows, deteriorated street pavement and fence. 118. PCD: Hawthorne Court and Magnolia Avenue: Deteriorated and dilapidated residence, deteriorated roof, outdoor storage, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 59 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 119. PCD: Hawthorne Court and Magnolia Avenue: Unsafe, unhealthy, deteriorated and dilapidated building, deteriorated paint and roof, broken and boarded windows, graffiti, overgrown vegetation, outdoor storage. 120. PCD: Hawthorne Court and Magnolia Avenue: Lack of infrastructure, unpaved street, lack of sidewalks, standing water, poor drainage, outdoor storage. Petaluma Community Development Commission 60 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 121. PCD: 29 Lakeville Street: Extensively deteriorated residence, deferred maintenance, deteriorated siding, paint, eves and windows, overgrown vegetation. 122. PCD: Petaluma Boulevard North and Lakeville Street, NE: Vacant and underutilized parcel, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 61 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 123. PCD: Petaluma Boulevard North and Lakeville Street, SE: Large holes in rear wall of deteriorated masonry building, external wiring. 124. PCD: Lakeville Street between Petaluma Boulevard South and Cedar Grove Park: Deteriorated residence, chipped and peeling paint, holes in siding, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 62 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 125. PCD: Petaluma Boulevard North and Shasta Avenue: Deteriorated wooden structure, deteriorated roof, missing gutters and downspouts, broken and boarded window, overgrown vegetation. 126. PCD: 1270 Petaluma Boulevard North: Vacant and underutilized commercial building. Petaluma Community Development Commission 63 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 127. PCD: 1482 Petaluma Boulevard North: Deteriorated metal awning with informal exterior braces, deteriorated siding, rust, boarded window. 128. PCD: 1933 Petaluma Boulevard North (Rear): Dilapidated wooden structure, incomplete and informal construction, missing siding, sagging roof, alignment problems. Petaluma Community Development Commission 64 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 129. PCD: 2163 Petaluma Boulevard North: Deteriorated residence, alignment problems, hanging gutters. 130. PCD: 2600 Block of Petaluma Boulevard North, between Gossage Avenue and Oak Lane: Illegal dumping. Petaluma Community Development Commission 65 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 13 1. PCD: 2600 Block of Petaluma Boulevard North, between Gossage Avenue and Oak Lane: Dilapidated wooden structure, unsafe and unhealthy, deteriorated siding and roof, unpaved road, lack of sidewalks or curbs. „,, 132. PCD: 2560 Petaluma Boulevard North: Dilapidated building, deteriorated and rusted roof, deteriorated siding, paint and windows, broken windows, large separation between main building and attached shed. Petaluma Community Development Commission 66 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 133. PCD: 3028 Petaluma Boulevard North: Vacant, deteriorated building, hanging and damaged awning, overgrown vegetation. 134. PCD: 3340 Petaluma Boulevard North: Extensively deteriorated wooden structure, deteriorated siding and sagging roof, chipped and peeling paint, ad hoc repairs, deferred maintenance, alignment problems. Petaluma Community Development Commission 67 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 135. PCD: 3616 Petaluma Boulevard North: Deteriorated residence, chipped and peeling paint, overgrown vegetation. 136. PCD: 3624 Petaluma Boulevard North: Outdoor storage, damaged fence. Petaluma Community Development Commission 68 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 vacant residence, missing portions of foundation, chipped and peeling paint. 138. PCD: 3700 Block of Petaluma Boulevard North between Skillman Lane and Emerald Drive: Dilapidated wooden shed, mold on siding, deteriorated roof, broken and missing windows, unsafe and unhealthy. Petaluma Community Development Commission 69 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 139. PCD: 430 Bailey Avenue: Potential incompatible use between agricultural mill abutting residential property. 140. PCD: 5448 Petaluma Boulevard and Lily Vine Way: Extensively deteriorated wooden structure, deteriorated siding, chipped and peeling paint, broken and deteriorated windows, sagging roof, informal construction. Petaluma Community Development Commission 70 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 141. PCD: Stony Point Road and Old Redwood Highway, NW: Vacant and underutilized lot, ponding water. and underutilized land for sale. Petaluma Community Development Commission 71 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 143. PCD: Old Redwood Highway between Redwood Way and Ely Road (Rear): Deteriorated metal and wood structure located in the rear of the former ACE Hardware store, currently not in use, graffiti, overgrown vegetation. 144. PCD: Old Redwood Highway between Redwood Way and Ely Road (Detail): Vacant, underutilized, former ACE Hardware store, deteriorated siding and paint, awning and gutters, graffiti, cracks in pavement. Petaluma Community Development Commission 72 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 145. PCD: Old Redwood Highway between Redwood Way and Ely Road (rear): Vacant, underutilized, former ACE Hardware store, deteriorated roof and siding, chipped and peeling paint, deteriorated fence, cracks in pavement. 146. PCD: Old Redwood Highway between Redwood Way and Ely Road: Deteriorated wooden building, deferred maintenance, deteriorated signage, paint. Petaluma Community Development Commission 73 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 t 146. PCD: Old Redwood Highway between Redwood Way and Ely Road: Deteriorated wooden building, deferred maintenance, deteriorated signage, paint. Petaluma Community Development Commission 73 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 147. PCD: D Street and Lakeville Street, SE: Vacant and undemtilized land, potential hazardous materials waste storage, overgrown vegetation. 148. PCD: D Street and Lakeville Street, SE: Vacant and underutilized land for lease, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 74 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 149. PCD: Hopper Street: Junkyard, inactive vehicles, outdoor industrial storage. 150. PCD: Hopper Street: Inactive railroad, outdoor industrial storage, deteriorated fence, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 75 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 151. PCD: Hopper Street: Deteriorated tanks with apparent mildew, deteriorated fence. 152. PCD: 1000 Block of Lakeville Street and East Court: Vacant and underutilized land, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 76 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 153. PCD: 800 Payran Street: Vacant and underutilized commercial building for lease. 154. PCD: 980 Lindberg Lane: Deteriorated wooden commercial building, deteriorated shingled roof and siding, peeling paint. Petaluma Community Development Commission 77 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 156. PCD: East Court (End): Deteriorated fence, graffiti. Petaluma Community Development Commission 78 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 157. PCD: East Court: Deteriorated street pavement, potholes. 158. PCD: 112 East Court: Incomplete construction, deteriorated siding and windows. Petaluma Community Development Commission 79 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 161. PCD: Edith Street and Madison Street SW: Vacant and underutilized land. 162. PCD: Edith Street and Madison Street SW: Lack of curbs and sidewalks. Petaluma Community Development Commission 81 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 163. PCD: 150 Edith Street: Deteriorated residence, deteriorated roof, gutters and windows. 164. PCD: 168 Graylawn Avenue: Sagging deck. Petaluma Community Development Commission 82 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 165. PCD: 20 Woodworth Way: Deteriorated residence, deteriorated roof and eves, significant moss on roof. wiring, deteriorated paint. Petaluma Community Development Commission 83 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 167. PCD: 319 Vallejo Street: Deteriorated residence, deferred maintenance, deteriorated roof and siding. 168. PCD: Palmer Street and Vallejo Street: Dilapidated, unsafe and unhealthy shed, deteriorated roof, siding, paint and fence, deferred maintenance. Petaluma Community Development Commission 84 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 169. PCD: Edith Street near Dewey Street: Vacant and underutilized parcel. 170. PCD: Holly Lane and Madison Street: Deteriorated residence, deteriorated siding, alignment problems, chipped and peeling paint. Petaluma Community Development Commission 85 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 171. PCD: 801 Holly Street: Outdoor storage of equipment and materials blocking entrance. 172. iPCD: Holly Street: Deteriorated residence, deteriorated and sagging roof, trash accumulation, cracked pavement. Petaluma Community Development Commission 86 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 173. PCD: Burlington Drive and Arlington Drive: Vacant property, lack of sidewalks and curbs, trash accumulation. 174. PCD: 21 Arlington Drive: Deteriorated residence, faded, chipped, and mildew stained paint, deteriorated garage doors, overgrown vegetation. Petaluma Community Development Commission 87 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 175. PCD: 61 Arlington Drive: Deteriorated residence, holes in siding, peeling paint, deferred maintenance. 176. PCD: 153 Arlington Drive: Deteriorated residence with ad hoc repairs, informal construction, and deteriorated roof. Petaluma Community Development Commission 88 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 i 177. PCD: 9A Alma Court: Extensive evidence of mold on eve. building, extensively deteriorated roof and eves. Petaluma Community Development Commission 89 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 179. PCD: Stub Road and Scott Street: Vacant and underutilized commercial building for lease or sale. 180. PCD: Holm Road and Rand Street: Vacant and underutilized commercial building for lease or sale. Petaluma Community Development Commission 90 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 182. PCD: North McDowell Boulevard and Ross Street: Vacant and underutilized lot. Petaluma Community Development Commission 91 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 183. PCD: 1300 Block of North McDowell Boulevard: Illegal dumping of materials. 184. PCD: 320 Corona Road: Dilapidated structure, sagging roof and walls, misalignment of walls, deteriorated paint and doors, deferred maintenance. Petaluma Community Development Commission 92 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 185 PCD: 320 Corona Road: Deteriorated residence, deteriorated walls, roof and gutters, apparent mold. 186. PCD: North McDowell Boulevard and Corona Road: Dilapidated wooden structure, unsafe and unhealthy, lack of foundation, deteriorated roof, walls, paint, missing door. Petaluma Community Development Commission 93 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 187. PCD: 737 South Point Boulevard: Vacant and underutilized commercial building for lease. 188. PCD: 720 South Point Boulevard: Vacant and underutilized commercial building for lease. Petaluma Community Development Commission 94 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 189. PCD: South Point Boulevard and North McDowell Boulevard: Underutilized, narrow parcel, inactive railroad tracks, overgrown vegetation. 190. PCD: 717 North McDowell Boulevard: Deteriorated residence, unsafe, sagging overhang above front entrance, large hole in siding, poor foundation support. Petaluma Community Development Commission 95 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 191. PCD: North McDowell Boulevard between Transport Way and Lynch Creek Way: Vacant and underutilized land. Petaluma Community Development Commission 96 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 193. PCD: North McDowell Boulevard southeast of Lynch Creek Way: Vacant and underutilized land, ponding water. 194. PCD: North McDowell Boulevard and Scott Street: Vacant and underutilized land. Petaluma Community Development Commission 97 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 y 195. PCD: Petaluma Village Premium Outlets looking easterly from Petaluma Boulevard and Factory Outlet Drive: Stores required rehabilitation due to flood damage. 196. PCD: Petaluma Village Premium Outlets looking easterly from Petaluma Boulevard at the southerly end of the outlet stores: Outlet detention ponds exceeded capacity, businesses, storage areas flooded. Petaluma Community Development Commission 98 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 197. PCD: US 101 Freeway and Old Redwood Highway in the "Cattleman's Restraurant Area, looking southwesterly: Major arterials impassable, restaurant, gas stations and other services flooded. 198. PCD: Petaluma Boulevard at the Corona Road Area. Also shown is the Denman Reach Trailhead: Stockyard silage manure pools flooded, leaching potential hazardous contamination to River and other properties. Petaluma Community Development Commission 99 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 199. PCD: Holm Road, US 101 Freeway and Auto Center Drive looking westerly toward Petaluma Boulevard North: Businesses and vehicle stock flooded. 200. PCD: Youngstown Mobile Home Park and the PG&E Substation at Corona Road, looking northwesterly: Significant flood damage to residential area consisting of mainly senior housing, including potential contamination from mold and hazardous materials in floodwaters. Petaluma Community Development Commission 100 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 201. PCD: Petaluma Boulevard and Gossage Avenue, looking easterly: Significant flood damage to area residences. Potential contamination from mold and hazardous materials in floodwaters. 202. PCD: Coffer Dam in area of Jess Avenue and Oak Creek Apartments, looking southwesterly: Beginning of recently constructed flood control project. All properties within flood control projects area were protected. Petaluma Community Development Commission 101 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 203. PCD: Petaluma River at the Sewer crossing in area of Hunt and Behrens Feed Mill, looking easterly: SBC conduit crossing trapping debris and causing potential restriction in floodwaters. Petaluma Community Development Commission 102 Photograph Appendix Petaluma Plan Amendment and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix C Potential Funding Sources q E U O U O U � U O O O O O E L `o vFi o c° F F O 3 F 5 ° o v —0°' E. c yLo ceF � eo.E C v '�>v H 'c FQe •O=9 -E a ° .n Nn 3 c E yvE auE a= c> 9 0 o c EF y F c E .E E `A CE 5 �. ° e •O s N -v' 3 c v N o E o v E u = L m H uOu o'E p E �v-- ..� •e .c �e a_ SQo `o .o n v >„° � o ' �°•-_' `o e a u m u E � c A o� e R ".� .>_ 'c c E'S1c E2�rt{o F'N '$ c ,=Ee2yv� SNE colo I L u^ E o�Ey 3�F..n n�E 5. vE'E `rte. -u •ry:o Tri c cvi u�.5 c• �;e o 'S�n 3 c ers 5 ° u 011 = n 3 3 c c cu- EL � ° e2'a'—T3 0 " F v'EJL E c.o �a c c T Lia c v n` m u 2 a e E_ E 5 C F'K c� U•u C.c a y .5 °' C 0.• J�,O V N N C O.. O u L y e L d Q E•` c mJ o > 5 A c..c c •�•e ou v F m E •� cvc mo y° vv-cm o•o°�a.°.� Ea � m'^0�'c9 Qo�3g a n EE'�= a° c �2 � n a E c c�=° n c � m.F o f •o.� " ai c "° ° cF EE E Eo •o Fp; c E u muA un c>,•Ouv e� ovn'r�° qq. LFO�EIlN E04°�9 N'.F+mC O ^eJ tmj 9'°'=6uj QyL O v o c �°L•oE vEL'� uEA F9 -62 .�E c a a c E c E ° u> N °a •°F3cF°��E=c.E $-'oeu E F>cmENJ"vc > L e 'E N E ;E 9 c E o 5 n m tt.E n v E v v 9 3 Si nm E> a �: Z n g V o n o u E— N c CE:E� ° E E °�=v>E� 2Fv$O c°1 T3 N ° c a E,o Ewi, cc�E9.� "s°E.° Eoco ' a'��E� E � j�EEcca EE yc�>N> �aP�=•�e c_ vn�°uU e°F nU vv.Ou c cy N u c E E sF W to — aE cv v>9 o y F oczt E9 n'^nUCco E c c vn E o> 0 u z ze❑Gz z 'z 'z z a T `u n ti C V c E i a c e IJ Y d E E'�.]U q 4 UF'O E �'F 6 T ? V'O E > cW Qv`�rl ❑ w— rn W ZF A❑F-U S � ❑ ❑c q ..i 5 n E i a c e IJ Y d E m }, �o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ao L U C ry c v 12 12 n2 a E c o� o •- 'Q ca v o° o= E v v c= a c E s u o n ? R n E --..v. a = 4'S a v o m° e a 5 E �o 49 n ` _ ro > EE E'e g•[ o y°y° o.E c u 3 EC m U v E o v c m >, c n °� v .r c' v N u o °`Y CO u n^E°"mu 5 3 e E' 9 3 v Q v u d>^.° _' '•' a �'" > E o 0 o c E c o u _E.rni- cEi ux o c.o ;,_, 9 F'S >o G_ yq S s c mwv m a cS yn 'e Ro a E6 CC - E u m'c• E o P: eu o °1 .� m'E 9 o r`v N E > d C .w - o 0 0 6 y y E E vEi u .n m'o y u o> •a nn > 0 9 `w, v o > u C• - �'o >. 'v' e000 Eo.an Ino noeEyL qc gQU�s� vv� onn�W� >C' v e 6 en a o' C C' a '� •° 'J .. e 6 ° ° v v o• _ o C o v can n s r n $ T n c c S n E° .tl n o o . i yw°'tea v�aC� n"S _''o '°G.v vaq^9 vu :o NEca. •_> ° .c.. °.� u u Hs c o yy E`E�uu vvE �.g.- v2�EE EE._ou nom E' fic•E'y v'n cE F -U SEnCvin 6 n v o c o •E�...fe�W _cyEu - E S o eo � °it E� EEX c.=�u�j o� m moo= Ug 'G> E c° v u c .o o¢ g E �' c S o � o o E E o c mE; E E:E aen .y°W u c Uc c o y>'EoE ,Q W Q00. Q0. UQ U u C. 6q O C > J m E u p C E x o s > El o y o t°rU v 3 o E b E u Z.`vu a cv. ac. a W E US O E >> c °U O ..._ UQO mE.-°iUR �c. .T.a Sti FF'cc' 6 mm io n a o �— i E O P a 74 a•^ - o '•3 C' o d v d o n y « 7 d��, cE E °� y� �' i uM c J �i G 'o d a• m ,P a 'U n o N ... -s g >• � o a c ,°o x 9 c o o R 'G°',� •da 'PJ � "� E T 'J OP V.^G6 G.b d V' '•c o " m J .E *Eo v5 G E o o G Pwo«cda�eGi Ezz p 9'°bA app ki b NFL x� o•°'G I? r E a% yc L'udr. ,nP atv �. n n C O 9 G P V N m '^? O b 1•' 3 `'a >' aj �l d C .a °':"n .Pj U O U G G 4. 6 F"= a- 9 C J E 'Gou•« v •sr }. 5 T 2 G � p� 5u: -i •^ C:•p ulg G G O• � at T o 'C v L' 9 O w n 6 p_-�E va vi �'Ea ' :� v '�',^E'_°.up QU�"2 `�'a aYE.u�U..v .a. -loos-q•U. ^'o� - V •C:wP c11.G,P 6 U. P V - aEGloo as "a a �' v 5 E LJS d•E_c.G : O u CG _�] a O Via'? •^ V G h O O — •^ _- 3GypJ Gn d n > E V a•L «yo P-'3EM ^ Ec •a o u vE 0 P 9 a V 'r G° °• G � w cCA � G SP" L ° L ° O E¢ d'-• � N ..• P yL G❑E',E� 'S E3^_ .o ,o P -Vaca°`��"G"�u� noi`9v �a�qy£„' �itE aaG �•❑du�7V�I C^J1G n 'GEE .Q'S -E an�uo o« :.-$awT� fi J n �.", v n> y'e � S q E' c I� 'u Z' x E v a a a J •P o.E Q•- P `t3^ G J d`c a -&o �� `=u a ?�:a vE,?G'o4 a.. in x Jo�J E.•. m •.. �suy� N J � Wfio "o.°P1E�a a•P CJ mFP.. °1 G`b 3$« J«'o Ee ��J UCGiOv GG u '^ JL-ab°°>V'CP)1EL^O dti y.`j as o'E v°'e [°j0. '"'^j' yF. V '/:.•' E Q V a U J > '� O G S OV ... P S G `O N h O.� Gell a O a 'O y O° g E E L' oSutJd ea.a G d nuJ QE«icy°E'J'^".� EE=,ii f°--�� ,amu . JflC,C>q.NJj O %f yE;D ie.•Vw'^ a°Pan no afa O._o...> '= °,,, ° �+ � - � o a.q '; '�°„ � d � r°.o?U... " •" v c-°. a.E ax c �Na crus, �,c" N E c=-ni :°� o.a5C1°E-a aa�'i',^ a u.5 m E,. v.c aE G G 2 �;n n F J� a c� � K a .} 9 c E .� c'> my E �•�.' E N G a ,E BIY y N oG.^ N" aE 1-3 Pp LO G O "-•fE G O P GC L �,v •' � p G G „fj C 6. L O V n, G � N •i UGIIL tl G. C. V U n .N°',. r 'a " °_{ •> Q ni E r. m c V car. C ti u G• y F w.` G, r..•1:7 J'^ 3 0 ^ `o ...taui:.w � " G •'c o FQ nc"eE a � ,�` > •EE o� �.•. v^ E2 c:c 'fin "' .a o.'a.E °V vu Uvi eG° 4 E [,• ❑. "� uU �j o u u^au iC do VN GD cQ oQW ou% c!'E V>>. ` 3u 0«515uu«{C0 3o GLn 5E Ea e'. sa uG ?'ovc ii-•� �� 2o�o'Cv ao'o_�e.roO G� .oE nYw oQi3 °°^•> o,a �^ m Q� G.. i¢t6 C.u�F •. aE E.g, Gu C' 's' Eaa^ �`jym a_ on 2 •tlo Q� p �Yn'-Z =•^nio�� Ea:°C�.°ma ae GQ3V U U- sc C E G ".•, C: G GO =G C'E OE n'EJIn GZ�'J.ZxGVl Pd. UWU•WV.-+.- E U O G E o a E L E o of �¢ uq WdP¢z a c. aaG uE 2 u. 'u L� aE S Q E L) G [r-' t° nL EE >.c G, > p K F o � •a U E•°�- �a n u��y L'C°O cG' no M E $ > E u U " .{ !✓ ^wm 'tcrYoc d o h P a.,. n �b Lwti -aa„•dE . ^GE tp v7vi yJo� 'p°. G G _n. vv•°C•f a> -of0.�vv , c:�C �4F1eE-. U �n�• oO �JApaa u zP2 gGg Z yU c u U G F n \ % j� \ \�\ \�\ e :§g ){\ _ { !); (§{(\ ]) Bs,2:e - )� Appendix D Tax Increment Projections Table A -IA Summary of Total Projected Tax Increment From 2005/6 Through End of Project Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - PCD and CBD Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Nominal Constant Dollars 2005/06 Dollars County Distribution of Basic Incremental Taxes Incremental Tax Revenues $997,913,091 $410,856,489 Less: Unilateral 2% Election 46,283,859 18,782,593 Less: County Property Tax Admin Fee 16,964,523 6,984,560 Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 934,664,710 385,089,336 TI Available to Agency After Obligations Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 934,664,710 385,089,336 Less: Pass-Throughs to Taxing Entities 329,204,125 127,857,220 Less: State ERAF Payment 918,641 918.641 TI Available to Agency After Obligations 604,541,944 256,313,475 Projected Use of TI Funds Agency Administration(Non-Hsg) 30,244,743 13,200,740 TI Available for Housing Programs 190,325,846 78,414,779 TI Available for Non -Housing Projects 383,971354 164,697,956 Total TI Funds Used by Agency 604,541,944 256,313,475 Subtotal, TI for Housing & Projects 574,297,201 243,112,735 Cumulative TI for Housing Programs 2014/15 35,019,109 27,129,222 2024125 95,244,808 54,596,818 2034/35 169,152,651 74,782,442 2046/47 190,325,846 78,414,779 Cumulative TI for Non -Housing Projects 2014/ 15 80,438,183 62,216,278 2024/25 207,605,152 120,562,521 2034/35 342,739,587 157,751,981 2046/47 383,971,354 164,697,956 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table A -1B Summary of Projected Tax Increment by Project Area From 2005/6 Through End of Project Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - PCD and CBD PCD CBD Project Area Project Area TOTAL Future Value Dollars County Distribution of Basic Incremental Taxes Incremental Tax Revenues $767,014,945 $230,898,147 $997,913,091 Less: Unilateral 2% Election 46,283,859 0 46,283,859 Less: County Property Tax Admin Fee 13,039,254 3,925,268 16,964,523 Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 707,691,832 226,972,878 934,664,710 TI Available to Agency After Obligations Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 707,691,832 226,972,878 934,664,710 Less: Pass-Throughs to Taxing Entities 266,655,766 62,548,358 329,204,125 Less: State ERAF Payment 918,541 100 918,641 TI Available to Agency After Obligations 440,117,524 164,424,420 604,541,944 Projected Use of TI Funds Agency Administration (Non-Hsg) 27,170,471 3,074,272 30,244,743 TI Available for Housing Programs 144,146,217 46,179,629 190,325,846 TI Available for Non -Housing Projects 268,800,836 115,170,518 383,971,354 Total TI Funds Used by Agency 440,117,524 164,424,420 604,541,944 Subtotal, TI for Housing & Projects 412,947,053 161,350,147 574,297,201 Present Value Dollars County Distribution of Basic Incremental Taxes Incremental Tax Revenues 323,993,633 86,862,857 410,856,489 Less: Unilateral 2% Election 18,782,593 0 18,782,593 Less: County Property Tax Admin Fee 5,507,892 1 6 669 6,984,560 Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 299,703,148 85,386,188 385,089,336 TI Available to Agency After Obligations Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 299,703,148 85,386,188 385,089,336 Less: Pass-Throughs to Taxing Entities 106,783,827 21,073,393 127,857,220 Less: State ERAF Payment 918,541 100 918,641 TI Available to Agency After Obligations 192,000,780 64,312,695 256,313,475 Projected Use of TI Funds Agency Administration (Non-Hsg) 11,898,260 1,302,480 13,200,740 TI Available for Housing Programs 61,042,208 17,372,571 78,414,779 TI Available for Non -Housing Projects 119,060312 45,637,644 164,697,956 Total TI Funds Used by Agency 192,000,780 64,312,695 256,313,475 Subtotal, TI for Housing & Projects 180,102,520 63,010,215 243,112,735 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Yeur Fiscal (N) Year 0 2005/06 1 2006107 2 2007/08 3 2008109 4 20091 10 5 2010/ H 6 20111 12 7 2012/13 8 2013/ 14 9 2014115 10 2015/16 it 20161 17 12 2017/ 18 13 2018/ 19 14 2019/20 15 2020/ 21 16 2021/ 22 17 20221 23 18 2023/ 24 19 20241 25 20 2025/26 21 2026/27 22 2027/2S 23 2028/29 24 2029130 25 2030/31 26 2031/32 27 2032133 28 2033/ 34 29 2034/ 35 30 2035/36 31 2036137 32 2037/3B 33 20381 39 34 2039140 35 2040/41 36 2041) 42 37 2042/43 38 2043/44 39 2044/45 40 2045/46 41 2046147 TOTAL Cumulutive To: 20141 15 To: 2024125 To: 2034/35 Ta: 2046147 IU 1,unnauumal T. Revenues' 13,941,957 14,566,481 15,523,864 16,521,653 17,567,681 18,664,107 19,813,185 20,992,592 22,228,729 23,523,652 24,880,000 26,300,533 27,788,134 29,345,816 30,976,728 32,249,672 33,589,544 34,990,871 36,456,587 37,989,769 38,900,790 39,847,784 40,818,453 41,813,389 35,749,191 36,615,137 37,502,733 38,412,518 39,345,047 40,300,890 41,280,629 20,369,347 4,333,678 4,452,278 4,573,843 4,698,447 4,826,167 4,957,079 5,091,264 5,228,804 5,369,782 5.514.284 997,913,091 Table A -2A Tax Increment Projections Pemluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger- PCD end CBD (In Fumre Value or Nominal Dullars) Coanty Distribmion of Basic lnconeental Tues (2) (3) Unilateral COY. IV 296 Admin Elections Fee 619,248 237,013 662,542 247,630 706,702 263,906 751,745 280,868 797,690 298,651 844,553 317,290 892,353 336,824 941,110 356,874 990,842 377,888 1,041,569 399,902 1,093,308 1,146,083 1,199,913 1,254,821 1,310,827 1,367,952 1,426,219 1,485,653 1,546,275 1,608,110 1,671,182 1,735,515 1,801,134 I,B6B4O65 1,936,335 2,005,971 2,077,000 '_,149,448 2,223,345 2,298,721 2,375,604 2,454,024 46,283,859 422,960 447,109 472,398 498,879 526,604 548,244 571,0'_2 594,845 619,762 645,826 661,313 677.412 693,914 710,828 607,736 622,457 637,546 653,013 668,866 685,115 701,771 346,279 73,673 75,689 77,755 79,874 82,045 84,270 86,551 88,890 91,286 93.743 16,964,523 (4) Net Tues Reamed to Aeency _ 13,085,696 13,656,308 14,553,256 15,489,040 16,471,341 17,502,264 18,584,008 19,694,608 20,859,998 22,082,180 23,363,732 24,707,341 26,115,823 27,592,116 29,139,297 30,333,476 31,592,303 32,910,373 34,290,550 35,735,833 36,568,295 37,434,857 38,323,406 39,234,497 33,205,119 33,986,709 34,788,186 35.610,057 36,452,837 37,317,054 38,203,255 17,569,044 4,260,006 4,376,589 4,496,088 4,618,574 4,744,122 4,872,809 5,004,712 5,139,914 5,278,496 5A20.542 934,664,710 Aeencv Oblit. t_ ons (5) (6) (7) Pass- State Agenry Tle o ndt ERAF Admin Pnynnents Payment Exnensns 3,619,456 918,641 594,46i 3,753,979 0 612,298 3,978,348 0 632,71C 4,216,854 0 649,587 4,546,656 0 669,075 4,892,960 5,256,575 5,704,551 6,166,135 6,650,340 7,158,234 7,690,929 8,249,59 t 8,835,436 9,537,128 10,244,044 10,866,981 11,520,023 12,204,676 12,922,519 13,467,047 13,884,187 14,311,754 14,750,016 13,239,956 13,639,698 14,049,468 14,479,048 14,919,420 15,370,860 15,833,655 6,927,628 1,384,504 1,435,837 1,488,453 1,542,385 1,597,665 1,654,3'_7 1,712,406 1,771,937 1,832,956 1.895.500 329,204,125 0 689,147 0 709,822 0 731,116 0 753,050 0 775,641 0 798,911 0 822,878 0 847,564 0 872,991 0 899,181 0 926,156 D 953,941 0 982,559 0 1,012,036 0 1,042,397 0 1,073,669 0 1,105,879 0 1,139,055 0 1,173,227 0 1,124,767 0 1,158,510 0 1,193,265 0 1,229,063 0 1,265,935 0 1,303,913 0 1,343,030 0 563,102 0 51,972 0 53,531 0 55,137 0 65,837 0 67.812 918,641 30,244,743 183,343,900 8,248,3543 116,846 171,978,699 48,785,854 918,641 497.911,555 21,687,515 8.464,496 467,759,54-0 148,015,416 918,641 887,217,488 41.454,231 15,082,697 878,680,560 290,126,871 918,641 997.913091 46.283,859 16.964.523 9741564.710 329.204125 918.641 Based on revenues from Basic Tax Increment 0.0',0,,adusrve of bond mtmdes. Net Tu lncrement Ave1la6le for Hou in,-'ro mens (8) s (9) Annual Cumulaive 2,664,542 2,664,542 2,780,788 5,445,330 2,963,432 8,408,762 3,153,982 11,562,743 3,353,998 14,916,742 3,563,911 3,784,166 4,010,296 4,247,577 4,496,417 4,757,338 5,030,890 5,317,644 5,618,199 5,933,180 6,176,344 6,432,665 6,701,044 6,982,06'_ 7,276,332 7,445,922 7,622,454 7,803,464 7,989,065 6,762,571 6,921,833 7,085,147 7,252,614 7,424,340 7,600,434 7,781,005 3,583,065 866,736 890,456 914,769 939,689 965,233 991,416 1,018,253 1,045,761 1,073,956 1.102.857 190,325,846 18,480,652 22,264,819 26,275,115 30,522,693 35,019,109 39,776,448 44,807,338 50,124,982 55,743,181 61,676,361 67,852,705 74,285,370 80,986,414 87,968.476 95,244,808 102,690,730 110,313,184 118,116,647 126,105,712 132,868,283 139,790,117 146,875,263 154,127,877 161,552,218 169,152,651 18083,457 182,273,912 183.188,681 188,149,033 6,816,912 35,019,109 15,975,526 95,244,808 27,742,809 169,152,651 30.244,743 190325.846 - Net Tac Increment Available for Non-Housi. a Pmicets (10) (II) Annual Cumulative 5,288,593 5,288,593 6,509,243 11,797,836 6,978,766 18,776,602 7,468,617 26,245,219 7,901,611 34,146,830 8,356,246 42,503,076 8,833,445 51,336,521 9,248,644 60,585,165 9,693,236 70,278,401 10,159,782 80,438,183 10,649,249 91,087,432 11,162,645 102,250,077 11,701,024 113,951,101 12,265,490 12fi,216,591 12,7159,807 138,986,399 12,986,931 151,973,329 13,338,716 165,312,045 13,706,747 179,018,793 14,091,775 193,110,568 14,494,584 207,605,152 14,581,657 222,186,809 14,822,337 237,009,147 15,069,133 252,078,279 15,322,188 267,400,467 12,077,825 279,478,293 12,266,667 291,744,960 12,460,306 304,205,267 12,649,332 316,854,598 12,843,142 329,697,740 13,041,848 342,739,587 13,245,564 355,985,152 6,495,250 362,480,402 1,956,794 364,437,196 1,996,766 366,433,961 2,037,729 366,471,690 2,079,708 370,551,398 2,122,728 372,674,126 2,166.815 374,840,941 2,211,996 377,052,938 2,258,297 379,311,235 2,305,747 381,616,982 2354.373. 383.971.354 383,971,354 80,438,183 207,605,152 342,739,587 - 383971354 - Pemlurw Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Pcmluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger ApH12006 Year Fiscal (N) Year 0 2005106 1 2006/07 2 2007108 3 20081 09 4 2009/ 10 5 2010111 6 20111 12 7 2012/ 13 8 20131 14 9 20141 15 10 2015/ 16 11 20161 17 12 20171 IS 13 2018/ 19 14 2019120 15 20201 21 16 20211 22 17 20221 23 18 2023124 19 2024/ 25 20 2025/26 21 2026/27 22 2027128 23 20281 29 24 2029/30 25 2030/31 26 2031132 27 2032133 28 2033/ 34 29 2034/35 30 2035/36 31 2036/37 32 2037/ 38 37 2038139 34 2039140 35 2040/41 36 2041/42 37 2042143 38 2043144 39 2044145 40 2045/46 41 2046147 TOTAL Cumulative To: 2014115 To: 2024/ 25 To: 2034/ 35 To: 2046147 (1) lm0000mal Tax Revenues` 13,941,957 13,807,091 13,947,453 14,070,066 14,180,926 14,280,549 14,369,430 14,431,080 14,484,215 14.528,896 14,565,513 14,594,442 14,616,045 14,630,670 14,638,653 14,445,694 14,261,485 14,081,955 13,906,945 13,736,305 13,332,428 12,945,014 12,569,049 12,204,185 9,890,248 Table A -2B Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - PCD and CBD Do Present Value) County Distribution ,f Basic loci nenml Taxes (2) 13) Unilateral County 246 Admin Elections Fee 619,248 237,013 628,002 274,721 634,938 237,107 640,196 239,191 643,909 241,076 646,197 242,769 647,175 244,280 646,954 245,328 645,632 246,232 643,303 246,991 640,056 247,614 635,973 248,106 631,132 248,473 625,604 248,721 619,457 248,857 612,751 605,546 597,896 589,851 581,459 572,762 563,802 554,615 545,237 535,700 245,577 242,445 239,393 236,418 '_33,517 226,651 220,065 '_13,674 207,471 168,134 (4) Ni,, Taxes Remitted to Agency 13,085,696 12,944,368 13,075,408 13,190,678 13,295,942 13,391,583 13,477,974 13,538,798 13,592,351 13,638,601 13,677,843 13,710,363 13,736,440 13,756 744 13,770,339 13,587,366 13,413,494 13,244,666 13,080,676 12,921,329 12533,014 12,161,147 11,800,760 11,451,477 9,186,414 Aecrav Oblicat ons (5) 16) (7) Pass- State AgLm, Through ERAF Admin Payments Payment_ Expenses 3,619,456 918,641 594,465 3,558,274 0 580,378 3,574,356 0 568,460 3,591,130 0 553,198 3,670,137 0 540,089 3,743,772 3,812,309 3,9Z 1,519 4,017,847 4,107,445 4,190,649 4,267,777 4,339,132 4,405,001 4,506,955 4,588,646 4,613,915 4,636,193 4,655,668 4,672,512 4,615,547 4,510,439 4,406,956 4,305,127 3,662,921 9,601,723 526,033163,229 8,912,461 3,576,759 0 9,321,782 516,265 158,470 8,647,0471 3,492,174 0 9,050,162 506,420 153,853 8,369,890 3,411,329 0 8,786,607 496,521 149,372 8,140,713 3,331,832 0 6,530,870 486,592 145,025 7,899,253 3,253,695 0 8,282,711 476,651 140,806 7,665,254 3,176,928 0 3,873,922 466,716 65,857 3,341,349 1,317,523 0 781,228 13,281 767,947 249,583 0 760,766 12,933 747,833 245,343 0 740,79412,594 728,201 '_41,075 0 721,304 12,262 709,0421 236,786 0 702,286 (1,939 690,3471 232,486 0 683,73071,623 672,107 228,182 0 665,629 71,316 654,3131 223,879 0 647,9721 1016 636,957 219,585 0 630,751 10,723 620,0291 215,305 0 613.958 10.437 601.520 211044 0 410,856,489 18,782,593 6,984,560 385,089,33611 127,857,220 918,641 142,041,662 6,395,554 2,414,708 133,231,40011 37,616,244 918,641 285,519769 12,535,279 4,853,829 268,170,26111 82,492,692 918,641 391,751,436 17,839,227 6,659,774 367,252,437 121,059,501 918,641 410 856,189 18.782.597 fi 984 560 38i 089336 122857.220 918 641 Based on revenues foam Bmic To. Increment (LO%), exclusive of band ov,md. Present value discount mte: 5.5% Petaluma Community Development Commission Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger 527,'_90 514,795 502,596 49,4686 479,059 467,707 456,6'_4 445,803 435,239 424,925 414,856 405,025 395,428 386,057 376,909 367.977 359,258 350,744 342,433 311,174 303,80C 296,601 289,573 282,711 276,012 '_69,471 107,093 9,369 9,147 8,93C 8,719 8,512 8,310 8,113 7,921 7,733 7.550 13,200,740 Net T. Increment 1 Available for Housioe 'mcmms (8) (9) Annual Cumulative 2,664,542 2,664,542 2,635,818 5,300,360 2,662,503 7,962,862 2,685,974 10,648,836 2,707,404 13,356,240 2,726,871 16,083,110 2,744,451 18,827,561 2,756,825 21,584,387 2,767,717 24,352,103 2,777,118 27,129,222 2,785,091 2,791,694 2,796,983 2,801,013 2,803,839 2,766,589 2,731,188 2,696,812 2,663,419 2,630,969 2,551,933 2,476,242 2,402,887 2,371,790 1,870,910 1,615,138 1,761,104 1,708,749 1,658,017 1,608,856 1,561,212 681,441 156,246 152,153 148,159 144,261 140,457 136,746 133,126 129,594 126,150 122.792 78,414,778 5,351,015 27,129,222 9,559,588 54,596,818 12,739,871 74,782,442 13.200740 78,414.779 29,914,313 32,706,007 35,502,989 38,304,003 41,107,842 43,874,430 46,605,618 49,302,430 51,965,849 54,596,818 57,148,751 59,624,993 62,027,880 64,359,670 66,230,580 68,045,717 69,806,821 71,515,570 73,173,587 74,782,442 76,343,654 77,025,096 77,181,341 77733.494 77,481,653 77,625,914 77:766571 77,903,117 78,036,243 78,165,837 78,291,988 78,414.779 Net Tax Increment Available for Nun -Hous! u• Pmiccc (10) (11) Annual Cumulative 5,288,593 5,288,593 6,169,899 11,458,492 6,270,089 17,728,581 6,360,376 24,088,957 6,378,313 30,467,270 6,393,651 6,406,419 6,357,858 6,316,102 6,274,979 6,234,396 6,194,269 6,154,522 6,115,091 6.034,620 5,817.276 5,663,366 5,516,233 5,375,532 5,240,938 4,997,556 4,815,208 4,640,173 4,472,128 3,341,410 3,216,734 3,097,168 2,980,239 2,868,154 2,760,691 2,657,643 1,235,292 352,750 341,190 330,037 319,276 308,891 298,869 289,195 279,856 270,840 262.135 164,697,956 62,216,278 120,562,521 157,751,981164697956 36,860,921 43,267,340 49,625,198 55,941,300 62,216,278 68,450,675 74,644,943 80,799,166 86,914,557 92,949,177 98,766,452 104,429,819 109,946,052 115,321,583 120,562,521 125,560,078 130,375,286 135,015,458 139,487,586 142,828,996 146,045,729 149,142,897 152,123,137 154,991,291 157,751,981 160,409,625 161,644,917 161,997,666 162,338,856 162,668,893 162,988,169 163,297,060 163,595,929 163,885,124 164,164,981 164,435,821 164.697.956 Prclt numry Repan April 2006 Attachment Table B-1 Summary of Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Community Development Project Summary of Assumptions Growth Assumptions 2005/06 Secured Assessed Value: $1,096,092,290 2005/06 State Board Assessed Value: SO 2005/06 Unsecured Assessed Value: $482.298.965 2005/06 Total Assessed Value: $1,578,391,255 2005/06 Unitary Payments (Estimated): $13,259 Annual Inflation Adjustment on Secured Assessed Value: 2.0090 Annual Growth from Reassessments on Secured Assessed Value: 0.5090 New Development Assessments from FY 2007/08 through FY 2024/25: 2.590 of Secured Assessed Value Annual Growth in Unsecured Assessed Value: 0.0090 Tax Increment Generation 707,691,832 Basic Property Tax Rate: 1.090 Effective Bond Override Rate for FY 2005/06: 0.0090 Countv Proaem Tax Admin Fee: 1.700.' Sponsoring Community City's Unadiusted Levv Within Proiect Area: 13.24901 Historical Information Base Assessed Value: 331,539,332 Historical TI to Agency through 2004/05 exclusive of FY 2002/03, FY 2003/04 and FY 2004/05 State ERAF Pavmems: 80.187,455 Tax Increment Projections From 2005/06 Through End of Project Constant Future Dollars 2005/06 Dollars Tax Increment (TI) to Agency Incremental Tax Revenues $767,014,945 $323,993,633 Less: 2°o Inflation Allocation 46.283.859 18.782.593 Total Tax Increment Allocated to Agency 720,731,086 305,211,039 Less: County Property Tax Admin Fee 13.039.254 5,507,892 Net Tax Increment to Agency 707,691,832 299,703,148 TI Available to Agency After Obligations Tax Increment to Agency 707,691,832 299,703,148 Less: Contractual Pass -Through Payments 209,937,625 88,930,356 Less: Statutory Pass -Through Payments 56,718,142 17,853,472 Less: Agency ERAF payment 918.541 918.541 TI Available to Agency After Obligations 440,117,524 192,000,780 Projected Use of TI Funds Tl Available for Housing Programs 144,146,217 61,042,208 Tl Available for Non -Housing Projects 268.800.836 119.060.312 Total TI Funds Used by Agency 440,117,524 192,000,780 Cumulative 'I I for Housing Programs 2014/ 15 28,507,959 22,255,349 2024/ 25 72,947,770 42,530,877 2034/35 134,446,759 59,124,725 2038/39 144,146,2.17 61,042,208 Cumulative Tl for Non -Housing Projects 2014/15 61,077,988 47,642,486 2024/25 147,712,052 87,428,299 2034/35 252,857,542 115,909,266 2038/39 268,800,836 119,060,312 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Year Fiscal (N) Y.,IS 2005/ 06 19 2006107 20 2007108 21 2008/09 22 2009/ 10 23 2010/ 11 24 2011/ 12 25 2012/ 13 26 2013/ 14 27 2014/ 15 28 2015/ 16 29 2016/ 17 30 2017/ 18 31 2018/ 19 32 2019/ 20 33 2020/ 21 34 2021/ 22 35 2022/ 23 36 2023/ 24 37 2024/ 25 38 2025/ 26 39 2026/27 40 2027/ 28 41 2028/29 42 2029130 43 2030131 44 2031/32 45 2032/33 46 2033/34 47 2034/35 48 2035/36 49 2036137 50 2037138 51 2038/39 TOTAL Cumulnlive To: 2014/ 15 To: 2024125 To: 2034/ 35 To: 2036139 (1) Basic Tax Rate 1.000'.'0 1.0017% 1,000% 1.000% 1,000"6 1OW% 1.000% 1.000';0 L00096 L00096 1.000'% L0009i, 1.00090 1.000% 1.000% 1.000% 1.000",6 1.000",6 1.000% LOOM% 1.000% 1.0W"16 1.00096 1.000% L000",6 1.000",6 1.000'116 1.00096 1.000% 1.00096 1,00096 1.000% 1.000% 1,000% Tax Incrma, �t to Avenc- (2) (3) (4) Incremental 2% County Tax Marion Admin Revenues' Allocmim, Fee 17,537,379 619,248 213,135 12,812,772 662,542 217,817 13,382,945 706,702 13,976,010 751,745 14,598,728 797,690 15,252,582 844,553 15,939,128 892,353 16,660,002 941,110 17,416,920 990,842 18,211,683 1,041,569 19,046,185 1,093,308 19,922,412 1,146,083 20,842,450 1,199,913 21,808,490 1,254,821 22,822,831 1,310,827 23,887,890 1,367,952 25,006,202 1,426,219 26,180,430 1,485,653 27,413,369 1,546,275 28,707,955 1,608,110 29,374,415 1,671,182 30,070,734 1,735,515 30,784,461 1,801,134 31,516,032 1,868,065 32,265,891 1,936,335 33,034,497 2,005,971 33,822,318 2,077,000 34,629,835 2,149,448 35,457,540 2,223,345 36,305,937 2,298,721 37,175,544 2,375,604 16,151,377 2,454,024 0 0 0 0 767.014.945 46.283.859 227,510 237,592 248,178 259,294 270,965 283,220 296,088 309,599 323,785 338,681 354,322 370,744 387,988 406.094 425,105 445,067 466,027 488,035 499,365 511,202 523,336 535,773 548,520 561,586 574,979 588,707 602,778 617,201 631,984 274,573 Attachment Table B -2A Tae Increment Revenue to Agency Pemluma Community Development Project (In Future Value, ar "Actual" Delta.) Agency Obligations (5) (6) (7) (8) Tax Contractual Statutory Agency Increment Pass -Through Pus -Through ERAF ro Agency Payments Pavments Paymr 11,704,995 3,478,643 0 918,541 11,932,413 3,544,563 0 0 12,448,733 3,697,111 0 0 12,986,673 3,856,098 0 0 13,552,860 4,023,513 79,193 0 14,148,735 4,199,785 162,720 0 14,775,810 4,385,367 249,301 0 15,435,672 16,129,990 16,860,516 17,629,092 18,437,648 19,288,215 20,182,924 21,124,016 22,113,844 23,15},878 2},249,710 25,401,067 26,611,810 27,203,868 27,824,017 28,459,992 29,112,194 29,781,036 30.466,940 31,170,339 31,891,680 32,631,416 33,390,015 34,167,956 13,422,779 4,580,734 4,786,388 5,002,851 5,230,675 5,470,439 5,722,750 5,988,248 6,267,602 6,561,518 6,870,735 7,196,030 7,538,221 7,898,164 8,072,426 8,255,048 8,442,351 8,634,451 8,831,473 9,033,540 9,240,782 9,}53,331 9,671,321 9,894,892 10,124,186 3,984,392 0 0 0 0 0 0 13,039.254 707.691.832 209.937.625 340,665 0 436,551 0 537,211 0 642,907 0 753,915 0 870,522 0 993,030 0 1,209,146 0 1,436,212 0 1,674,812 0 1,925,562 0 Z,189,102 0 2,466,107 0 2,753,455 0 2,902,982 0 3,056,131 0 3,213,000 0 3,373,688 0 3,538,297 0 3,706,932 0 3.879,699 0 4,056,708 0 4,238,072 0 4,423,906 0 1,608,813 0 0 0 0 0 56.718.142 918.541 _ 150,788,150 8,248,354 2,563,399 139,976,398 41,555,052 1,805,142 918,541 386,426,364 21,687,515 6,569,248 358,169,601 106,299,433 15,966,456 918541 713,688,024 41,454.231 12,132,696 660,101,097 195,829,N7 50,685,422 918,541 767.014.945 46.283.859 13.039.254 707.691.832 209.937.625 56.718.142 918.541 (9) 1 Agency Admin ExF. . 533,128 549,122 565,595 582,563 600,040 618,041 636,583 655,680 675,351 695,611 716,479 737,974 760,113 782,916 806,404 830,596 855,514 881,179 907,615 934,843 962,88E 991,775 1,021,521 1,052,174 1,083,739' 1,116,252 1,149,735' Tax Increment Available fur Huusine Proemms 0) (I1) Annual Cumulative 2,383,626 2,430,046 2,535,249 2,644,853 2,760,208 2,881,606 3,009,355 3,143,778 3,285,216 3,434,023 3,590,575 3,755,266 3,928,507 4,110,734 4,302,401 4,503,988 4,715,997 4,938,955 5,173,419 5,419,969 5,540,647 5,667,044 5,796,665 5,929,593 6,065,911 6,205,705 6,349,064 2,383,626 4,813,672 7,348,921 9,993,774 12,753,981 15,635,587 18,644,942 21,788,721 25,073,936 28,507,959 32,098,535 35,853,800 39,782,308 43,893,041 48,195,442 52,699,430 57,415,427 62,354,382 67,527,801 72,947,770 78,488,416 84,155,460 89,952,126 95,881,719 101,947,630 108,153,336 114,502,399 1,184,231 6.496.077 120,998,477 1,219,75N 6,646,839 127,645,315 1,256,751 6.801,443 134,446,759 1,294,042 6,959,988 141,406,747 512,643 2,739,471 144,146,217 C 0 144,146,217 C, 0 144.146.217 27 170 4711 144,146,217 -- 6,111,715 28507,959:_ _ 1},325,349 72,947,770 - 25,3fi7,7H6 134,446,759 - 27.170471 144.146.217 - - Net Tae Increment Available for Nnn-Huus'ne Preiecm (12) (13) Annual Cumulative 4,391,057 4,391,057 5,408,682 9,799,740 5,650,778 15,450,518 5,903,158 21,353,676 6,089,906 27,443,582 6,287,083 33,730,665 6,495,204 40,225,869 6,714,814 46,940,684 6,946,485 53,887,168 7,190,820 61,077,988 7,448,455 68,526,443 7,720,055 76,246,498 8,006,322 84,252,820 8,307,997 92,560,817 8,538,464 101,099,280 8,781,531 109,880,812 9,037,820 118,918,632 9,307,983 128,226,615 9,592,710 137,819,325 9,892,727 147,712,057 9,874,452 157,586,504 10,007,168 167,593,672 10,143,316 177,736,988 10,282,975 188,019,962 10,426,224 198,446,187 10,573,146 209,019,333 10,723,822 219,743,155 10,878,341 230,621,497 11,036,789 241,658,286 11,199,256 252,857,542 11,365,834 264,223,376 4,577,460 268,800,836 0 268,800,836 0 268.800.836 268.800.836 -- 61,077,938 - - 147,712,052 252,857,54Z 268800.836 - Based un revenues from Basic Tox Rate (1.096), exclusive of bund ovemde payments. ' PCDC's total ERAF shit for FY 2004/05 ,,as $918,641. This mad"is assumes the PCDC is required to malt the same amount for the FY 2005106 ERAF shift and the PCDC allocates most of tate total EIIAF shdt for the Petaluma Commumry Development Project Area. Assumptions: County Admin Fee u a% of"Incremcnml Tax Revenues": 1,7% TI for Housing Programs as a % of "Incremental Tan Revenues" lon "2% Imb mn Allocation": 20% Penticton Community Development Commission Preliminary Repot Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger ApH12006 Year Feed (N) Year 18 2005106 19 2006107 20 2007/08 21 2008/09 22 2009/ 10 23 2010/ 11 24 2011/ 12 25 2012/ 13 26 2013/ 14 27 2014/ 15 28 2015/ 16 29 2016/ 17 30 2017/ IS 31 2018/ 19 32 2019/ 20 33 2020/ ZI 34 2021/ 22 35 2022/ 23 36 2023/ 24 37 2024/ 25 38 2025/ 26 39 2026/ 27 40 2027/ 28 41 2028/ 29 42 2029/ 30 43 2030131 44 2031/ 32 45 2032/ 33 46 2033134 47 2034/ 35 48 2035/36 49 2036/37 50 2037/38 51 2038/39 TOTAL Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 To: 20241 25 To: 2034135 To: 2038139 (1) Basic Tax Rate 1.000'!6 1.000"6 1.000':6 1.000% 1.000% 1.0009h 1-00096 1.000% 1.000"6 1.000% 1.000'16 1.000".6 1.000'16 1.000",n 1.000'16 1.000% 1.00096 1.00096 1.000% 1.000% 1.000% 1.000",i, 1.00096 1.000% 1.000'16 1.000% 1.000"6 1.000% 1.00096 IAOOM 1.000%, 1.000% 1.00096 1.000% (2) Incremental Tax Revenues' 12,537,379 12,144,808 12,023,940 11,902,161 11,784,338 11,670,274 11,559,787 11,452,699 11,348,845 11,248,069 11,150,219 11,055,155 ]0,962,743 10,872,855 10,785,371 10,700,176 10,617,161 10,536,273 10,457.266 10,380,195 10,067,463 9.768,826 9,479,326 9,198,668 8,926,570 8,662,759 8,406,969 8,158,945 7,918,442 7,685,220 7,459,050 3,071,732 0 0 323.993.633 as, !.acme it m Aeencv (3) (4) (5) 2% County Tax Inflation Admin Increment Allocation Fee to Aecncy 619,248 213,135 11,704,99' 628,002 206,462 11,310,34 634,938 640,196 643,909 646,197 647,175 646,954 645,632 643,303 640,056 635,973 631,132 625,604 619,457 612,751 605,546 597,896 589,851 581,459 572,762 563,802 554,615 545,237 535,700 526,033 516,265 506,420 496,521 486,592 476,651 466,716 0 0 18.782593 204,407 202,337 200,334 198,395 196,516 194,696 192,930 191,217 189,554 187,938 86,367 84,839 83,351 81,903 180,492 179,]16 177,774 176,463 171,147 166,070 161,149 156,377 151,752 147,267 142,918 138,702 134,614 130,649 126,804 52,219 Attachment Table B -2B Tax Increment Revenue to Agency Petaluma Community Development Project (In Present Value, 2005/06 Delta,,) Agency Obligations 10,231,244 10,145,745 10,062,4121 9,982,563 9,905,522 9,831,123 9,759,211 9,689,641 9,622,273 9,323,554 9,038,954 8,763,562 8,497,054 8,239,119 7,989,458 7,747,785 7,513,823 7,287,307 7,067,98C 6,855,596 2,552,797 1(1) (7) (8) Cma.cmal Statutory Agency Pass -Through Pass -Through ERAF Payments Payments PoveoF 3,478,643 0 918,541 3,359,775 0 0 3,321,678 0 0 3,283,906 0 0 3,247,847 63,9Z6 0 3,213,400 124,120 0 3,180,469 180,805 0 3,148,965 234,186 0 3,118,805 284,456 0 3,089,907 331,797 0 3,062,197 376,378 0 3,035,604 418,355 0 3,010,061 2,985,505 2,961,877 2,939,121 2,917,184 2,896,017 2,875,574 2,855,811 2,766,654 2,681,748 2,599,616 2,520,160 2,443,285 2,368,899 2,296,914 2,227,247 2,159,817 2,094,545 2,031,357 757,767 0 C 0 0 C 0 5307.892 299,703.1481 88.930,356 457,878 495.086 571,405 643,327 711,094 774,936 835,068 891,693 943,689 943.067 941,061 937,787 933,353 927,861 921,405 914,075 905,951 897,113 887,630 305,970 (9) Agency Admin ExP_ 533,128 520,495 508,161 496,119 484,363 472,885 461,679 450,739 440,058 429,630 419,449 409,509 399,805 390,331 381,082 372,051 363,235 354,628 346,224 338,02C 330,01C 322,19C 0 314,555 0 307,101 0 299,824 0 292,719 0 285,782 0 0 0 0 17.853.472 918.541 117,672,298 6,395,554 2,000,429 109,276,316 32,443,395 1,219,290 918,541 225,189,663 12,535,279 3,828,224 20B,tl26,16C 61,962,345 7,394,509 918,541 313,462,850 17,839,227 5„328,868 290,294,755 86,141,231 16,659,871 918,541 32V993633 18 782.593 5.507.892 299.703.148 88.930356 17.851.472 918541 Net Tax Increment Available for Housim, Pregmms (10) (11) Annua] Cumulnivt 2,383,626 2,383,626 2,303,361 4,686,987 2,277,800 6,964,788 2,252,393 9,217,181 2,228,086 11,445,266 2,204,816 13,650,082 2,182,522 15,832,604 2,161,149 17,993,753 2,140,643 20,134,396 2,120,953 22,255,349 2,102,033 24,357,3B2 2,083,836 26,441,218 2,066,322 28,507,5401 2,049,450 30,556,990 2,033,183 32,590,173 2,017,485 34,607,658 2,002,323 36,609,981 1,987,665 38,597,647 1,973,483 40,571,130 1,959,747 42,530,877 1,898,940 44,429,817 1,841,005 46,270,822 1,784,942 48,055,764 1,730,686 49,786,450 1.678,174 51,464,624 1,627,345 53,091,969 1,578,141 54,670,110 279,01C 1,530,505 56,200,615 27Z,399 1,484,384 57,684,999 265,944 1,439,726 59,174,725 259,642 1,396,480 60,521,205 97,496 521,003 61,042,208 C 0 61,042,208 C, 0 61.042.298 11 H982601 61.042.208 4,797,2551 22,255,349 6- - 8,571,589 42,530,877 - 11,541,122I 59,124,725 -- - 11.898.260 61.042.208 Net Tax Increment Available for Nan-Huus'ne Pmiems (12) (13) Annual Cumulative 4,391,057 4,391,057 5,126,713 9,517,771 5,076,955 14,594,726 5,027,210 19,621,936 4,915,874 24$37,810 4,810,463 29,348,273 4,710,620 34,058,893 4,616,011 38,674,904 4,526,322 43,201,Z25 4,441,261 47,642,486 4,360,553 52,003,039 4,283,939 56,286,978 4,211,178 60,498,156 4,14Z,040 64,640,197 4,035,016 68,675,213 3,933,538 72,608,751 3,837,288 76,446,039 3,745,966 80,192,004 3,659,292 83,851,796 3,577,003 87,428,299 3,384,261 90,812,560 3,250,944 94,063,504 3,123,387 97,186,891 3,001,319 100,188,210 2,884,483 103,072,694 2,772,635 105,845,329 2,665,543 108,510,872 2,562,986 111,073,858 2,464,756 113,538,614 2,370,652 115,909,266 2,280,487 118,189,753 870,559 119,060,312 0 119,060,312 0 119.060.312 119.060.312 47,642,486 - - - - B7,428,299 - - - 115,909,266 119.060.312 - ' Based on rerenues from Basic Tax Rate (1.0^6), exdusme of bond ovemde paymems. PCDC's total ERAF shift far FY 2004/05s,.,s $918,641.'Me analysis assumes the PCDC is required to make the sante amount for the FY 7005/06 ERAF shift and the PCDC alloca[es most of the total ERAF shift for the Petaluma Commumty Development Project Area. Assumptions: Present value discounted to 2005/06 in, 5.5% Petaluma Community Development Co ntaissian Preliminary Region Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Attachment Table B-3 Basic Tax Revenues Petaluma Community Development Project Do Future Value, or "Actual" Dollars) Nous: First & Semnd Paymeum are based on rhe 196 basic tax mtc applied m the increase is AV Over Base. Supplemental Secured Assessments include reassessed property and new development. Supplemental Secured Payments are based on the 1 ".6 basic tax rate applied niche Supplemental Secured Assessments. Unitary payments are entreated to escalate annually by: 0.0% Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 First & Se -and Pavmenm n Aeenev I Supplemenml Privateers Total Basic Ta` Revenuer (1) (2) (3) 14) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Secured, Increase First & Supplemenml Supplemenml First & Supplemental Unimry Total Basic Year Fiscal State Board, in AV Second Secured Secured Second Secured Payments Tax, (1%6) (N) Year Unsecurd AV Over Base Pmvmenm I Assessements Pavmems Pavmenm Pzvmenm lievenucs 18 2005/06 1,578,470,861 1,246,931,529 12,469,315 5,480,461 5405 12,469,315 54,805 13,259 12,537.379 19 2006/ 07 1,605,873,168 1,274,333,836 12,743,338 5,617,473 56,175 12,743,338 56,175 13,259 12,812,772 20 2007/08 1,633,960,533 1,302,421,201 13,024,212 34,547,459 345,475 13,024,212 345,475 13,259 13,382,945 ZI 2008109 1,691,539,631 1,360,000,299 13,600,003 36,274,832 362,748 13,600,003 362,748 13,259 13,976,010 22 2009/ 10 1,751,997,684 1,420,458,352 14,204,584 38,088,573 380,886 14,204,584 380,886 13,259 14,598,728 23 20101 11 1,815,478,640 1,483,939,308 14,839,393 39,993,OOZ 399,930 14,839,393 399,930 13,259 15,252,582 24 2011/ 12 1,882,133,643 1,550,594,311 15,505,943 41,992,652 419,927 15,505,943 419,927 13,259 15,939,128 25 2012/ 13 1,952,121,397 1,620,582,065 16,205,821 44,092,285 440,923 16,205,821 440,923 13,259 16,660,002 26 2013/ 14 2,025,608,538 1,694,069,206 16,940,692 46,296,899 462,969 16,940,692 462,969 13,259 17,416,920 27 2014/ 15 2,102,770,037 1,771,230,705 17,712,307 48,611,744 486,117 17,712,307 486,117 13,259 18,211,683 28 20151 16 2,183,789,610 1,852,250,278 18,522,503 51,042,331 510,423 18,522,503 510,423 13,259 19,046,185 29 2016/ 17 2,268,860,162 1,937,320,830 19,373,208 53,594,448 535,944 19,373,208 535,944 13,259 19,922,412 30 2017/ 18 2,358,184,241 2,026,644,909 20,266,449 56.274.170 562,742 20,266,449 562,742 13,259 70,842,450 31 2018/ 19 2,451,974,525 2,120,435,193 21,204.352 59,087,879 590,879 21.204,352 590,879 13,259 21,808,490 32 2019/ 20 2,550,454,33 2,218,914,991 22,189,150 62,042,273 620,423 22,189,150 620,423 13,259 22,822,831 33 20201 21 2,653,858,110 2,322,318,778 3,223,188 65,144,386 651,444 23,223,188 651,444 13,259 23,887,890 34 20211 22 2,762,432,087 2,430,892,755 24,308,928 68,401,605 684,016 24,308,928 684,016 13,259 25,006,202 35 20221 23 2,876,434,763 2,544,895,431 25,448,954 71,821,686 718,217 25,448,954 718,217 13,259 26,180,430 36 203/ 24 2,996,137,573 2,664,598,241 26,645,982 75,412,770 754,128 26,645,982 754,128 13,259 27,413,369 37 2024/ 25 3,121,BZ5,523 2,790,286,191 27,902,862 79,183,409 791,834 27,902,862 791,834 13,259 28,707,955 38 20251 76 3,253,797,870 2,922,258,538 29,222,565 13,857,096 138,571 29,222,585 138,571 13,259 29,374,415 39 2026/ 27 3,33,083,353 2,991,544,021 29,915,440 14,203,524 142,035 29,915,440 142,035 13,259 30,070,734 40 2027/ 28 3,394,100,972 3,062,561,640 30.625,616 14,558,612 145,586 30,625,616 145,586 13,259 30,784,461 41 2028/ 29 3,466,894,032 3,135,354,700 31,353,547 14,922,577 149,226 31,353,547 149,226 13,259 31,516,032 42 2029/ 30 3,541,506,919 3,209,967,587 32,099,676 15,295,642 152,956 32,099,676 152,956 13,259 32,265,891 43 20301 31 3,617,985,128 3,286,445,796 32,864,458 15,678,033 156,780 32,864,458 156,780 13,259 33,034,497 44 2031/ 32 3,696,375,292 3,364,835,960 33,648,360 16,069,984 160,700 33,648,360 160,700 13,259 33,822,318 45 2032/ 33 3,776,725,210 3,445,185,878 34,451,859 16,471,733 164,717 34,451,859 164,717 13,259 34,629,835 46 2033/ 34 3,859,083,876 3,527,544,544 35,275,445 16,883,527 168,835 35,275,445 168,835 13,259 35,457,540 47 2034/ 35 3,943,501,508 3,611,962,176 36,119,622 17,305,615 173,056 36,119,62Z 173.056 13,259 36,305,937 48 2035/ 36 4,030,029,582 3,698,490,250 36,984,902 17,738,255 177,383 36,984,902 177,383 13,259 37,175,544 49 2036/ 37 4,118,720,857 3,787,181,525 37,871,815 18,181,711 181,817 37,871,815 181,817 13,259 38,066,891 50 2037/ 38 4,209,629,414 3,878,090,082 C 18,636,254 0 0 0 0 0 51 2038139 4.302.810.695 3.971.271.353 C 19.102.161 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL - - - - 776.764.51C -- - -- 11.741.6661 776.764.510 11.741.666 424.283 788.930A59 Cumulutivc To: 2014/ 15 - 147,245,608 _ 3,409,954 147,245,608 3,409,954 132,588 150,788,150 To: 2024/ 25 _ - _ 376,331,184 - - 9,830,003 376,331,184 9,830,003 265,177 386,426,364 To: 2034135 701,907.793 _ 11,382,467 701,907,793 11,382,467 397,765 713,688,024 To: 2039139 - -- - - - - 776.764.510 -- I L741.666 776 764.510 11 741.666 424.283 788.930.459 Nous: First & Semnd Paymeum are based on rhe 196 basic tax mtc applied m the increase is AV Over Base. Supplemental Secured Assessments include reassessed property and new development. Supplemental Secured Payments are based on the 1 ".6 basic tax rate applied niche Supplemental Secured Assessments. Unitary payments are entreated to escalate annually by: 0.0% Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 (1) Secured Year Fit.] AV (N) Year IS 2005/ 06 1,096,092,290 19 2006/ 07 1,123,494,597 20 2007/ 08 1,151,581,962 21 2008109 1,209,161,060 22 2009/ 10 1,269,619,113 23 2010/ 11 1,333,100,069 24 2011/ 12 1,399,755,072 25 2012/ 13 1,469,742,826 26 2013/ 14 1,543,229,967 27 2014/ 15 1,620,391,166 28 2015/ 16 1,701,411,039 20 2016/ 17 1,786,481,591 30 2017/ 18 1,875,805,670 31 2018/ 19 1,969,595,954 32 2019/ 20 2,068,075,752 33 2020/ 21 2,171,479,539 34 2021/ 22 2,280,053,516 35 2022/ 23 2,394,056,192 36 2023/ 24 2,513,759,002 37 2024/ 25 2,639,446,952 38 2025/ 26 2,771,419,299 39 2026/ 27 2,840,704,782 40 2027/ 28 2,911,722,401 41 2028/29 2,984,515,461 42 2029/ 30 3,059,128,348 43 2030131 3,135,606,557 44 2031/32 3,213,996,721 45 2032/ 33 3,294,346,639 46 2033134 3,376,705,305 47 2034/ 35 3,461,122,937 48 2035/ 36 3,547,651,011 49 2036/ 37 3,636,342,286 50 2037/ 38 3,727,250,843 51 2038139 3.820.432.114 TOTAL Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 - To: 2024/ 25 - To: 2034135 To: 2038/ 39 - Attachment Table B-4 Growth in Assessed Value Petaluma Community Development Project (In Future Value, or "Actual" Dollars) Groat t in Starred Assessed Value (2) (3) (4) foliation., RL' ..sed New Adjustments Property Development Asses meats Assessmenes 21,921,846 5,480,461 0 22,469,892 5,617,473 0 23,031,639 5,757,910 28,789,549 Z4.183.221 6,045,805 30,229,027 25,392,382 6,348,096 31,740,478 26,662,001 6,665,500 33,327,502 27,995,101 6,998,775 34,993,877 29,394,857 7,348,714 36,743,571 30,864,599 7,716,150 38,580,749 3Z,407,829 8,101,957 40,509,787 34,028,221 8,507,055 42,535,276 35,729,632 8,932,408 44,662,040 37,516,113 9,379,028 46,895,142 39,391,919 9,847,980 49,239,899 41,361,515 10,340,379 51,701,894 43,429,591 10,857,398 54,286,988 45,601,070 11,400,268 57,001,338 47,881,124 11,970,281 59,B51,405 50,275,180 12,568,795 6Z,843,975 52,788,939 13,197,235 65,986,174 55,428,386 13,857,096 0 56,614,096 14,203,524 0 58,234,448 14,551,612 0 59,690,309 14,922,577 0 61,182,567 15,295,642 0 62,712,131 15,678,033 0 64,279,934 16,069,984 0 65,886,933 16,471,733 0 67,534,106 16,883,527 0 69,222,459 17,305,615 0 70,953,020 17,738,255 0 72,726,846 18,181,711 0 74,545,017 18,636,254 0 76.408.642 19.102.161 0 - 809,918.669 Assumptions: Annual Inflationary Ilse. New Development Fse Property 11,Assessments Stam Board Annual Increase: Unsecured AV Annual Increase. Gmsvh Rates (5) (6) Annual Average Annual 2.5';6 2.5% 5.0';6 5.09". 5.0'76 5.096 5.0% 5.0% 5 Na 5.096 5.0% 5.096 5.0';". 5.0% 5.0';6 5.0% 5.096 5.096 5.0"6 50% 2.596 2.5% 2.5% 2.5"6 2.5% 2.5% 2.596 2.596 25'. 2.5% 2.5% N/A NIA 274,914,538 809,918,669 809,918,669 - 809.918.669 2.5% 2.5% 3X1, 3.7ti, 4.0% 4.2"6 4.3% 4.496 4.496 4.5% 4.596 4.696 4.696 4.6% 4.7% 4.7"6 4.7'% 4.7% 4.7% 4.7% 4.6% 4.596 4.5"6 4.4% 4.396 4.2% 4.296 4.1% 4.096 4.096 3.9% N/A N1,A Tom] Secured. Stam Board and Uns-cured AV (7) (8) (9) (10) Secured State Unsecured Secured, AV Hoard AV State Board, 13nsecurd AV 1,096,092 290 0 482,378,577 1,578,470,861 1,123,494,597 0 482,378,571 1,605,873,168 1,151,581,962 0 482,378,571 1,633,960,533 1,209,161,060 0 482,378,571 1,691,539,631 1,269,619,113 0 482,378,571 1,751,997,684 1,333,100,069 0 482,378,571 1,815,478,640 1,399,755,072 0 482,378,571 1,882,133,643 1,469,742,826 0 482,378,571 1,952,121,397 1,543,22%967 0 412,378,571 2,025,608,538 1,620,391,466 0 482,378,571 2,107,770,037 1,701,411,039 0 482,378,571 2,183,789,610 1,786,481,591 0 482,378,571 2,268,860,162 1,875,805,670 0 482,378,571 2,358,184,241 1,969,595,954 0 482,378,571 2,451,974,525 2,068,075,752 0 482,378,571 2,550,454,323 2,171,479,539 0 482,378,571 2,653,858,110 2,280,053,516 0 482,378,571 2,762,432,087 2,394,056,192 0 482,378,571 2,876,434,763 2,513,759,002 0 482,378,571 2,996,137,573 2,639,446,952 0 482,378,571 3,121,825,523 2,771,419,299 0 482,378,571 3,253,797,870 2,840,704,782 0 482,378,571 3,323,083,353 2,911,722,401 0 482,378,571 3,394,100,972 2,984,515,461 0 482,378,571 3,466,894,032 3,059,128,348 0 482,378,571 3,541,506,919 3,135,606,557 0 482,378,571 3,617,985,128 3,213,99fi,721 0 482,378,571 3,696,375,292 3,294,346,639 0 482,378,571 3,776,725,210 3,376,705,305 0 482,378,571 3,859,083,876 3,461,122,937 0 482,378,571 3,943,501,508 3,547,651,011 0 482,378,571 4,030,029,582 3,636,342,286 0 482,378,571 4,118,720,857 3,727,250,843 0 482,378,571 4,209,629,414 3.120.432.114 0 482.378.571 4.302 810 685 2.0% of Scented AV 2.596 of Secured AV from FY 2007/08 rh migh FY 2024/25 0.596 of Secured AV 0.096 Petaluma Community Development Com mission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Attachment Table B -5A Section 33676 Inflationary Allocations Petaluma Community Development Project (In Future Value, or "Actual' Dollars) Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) County Cinnabar Old Petaluma Waugh Petaluma So. Co. Petaluma Hl, Total Gencml Adobe City City IT Junior Eken-Unif Sec. 33676 Fund Union Elemenmry JT High College Failure Allocations Year Fiscal (N) Year IB 2005/06 227,924 9,782 9,677 84,462 8,512 144,876 43,093 90,922 619,248 19 2006/07 243,859 10,466 10,353 90,367 9,107 155,005 46,106 97,279 662,542 20 2007/08 260,113 11,164 11,043 96,390 9,714 165,336 49,179 103,763 706,702 21 2008109 276,692 11,876 11,747 102,534 10,333 175,874 52,313 110,376 751,745 22 2009/ 10 293,602 12,602 12,465 108,801 10,965 186,623 55,510 117,12Z 797,690 23 2010/ 11 310,851 13,342 13,197 115,193 11,609 197,587 58,771 124,003 844,553 24 2011/ 12 328,445 14,097 13,944 121,713 12,266 208,770 62,097 131,021 892,353 25 2012/ 13 346,391 14,867 14,706 128,363 12,936 220,177 65,490 138,180 941,110 26 2013/ 14 364,695 15,653 15.483 135,146 13,620 231,812 68,951 145,482 990,842 27 2014/ 15 383,366 16,454 16,276 142,065 14,317 243,680 72,481 152,930 1,041,569 28 2015/16 402,410 17,271 17,084 149,122 15,028 255,785 76,081 160,527 1,093,308 29 2016/ 17 421,835 18,105 17,909 156,320 15,753 268,132 79,753 168,276 1,146,083 30 2017/ 18 441,648 18,955 18,750 163,662 16,493 280,726 83,499 176,180 1,199,913 31 2018/19 461,858 19,822 19,608 171,151 17,248 293,572 87,320 184,242 1,254,821 32 2019/ 20 482,472 20,707 20,483 178,790 18,018 306,675 91,217 192,465 1,310,827 33 2020/ 21 503,498 21,609 21,376 186,582 18,803 320,040 95,192 200,852 1,367,952 34 2021/ 22 524,945 22,529 22,286 194,529 19,604 333,672 99,247 209,407 1,426,219 35 2022/23 546,821 73,468 23,215 202,635 20,421 347,577 103,383 218,133 1,485,653 36 2023/ 24 569,134 24,426 24,162 210,904 21,254 361,760 107,601 2Z7,034 1,546,275 37 2024/ 25 591,893 25,403 25,128 219,338 22,104 376,227 111,904 236,113 1,608,110 38 2025/26 615,108 26,399 26,114 227,941 22,971 390,983 116,293 245,373 1,671,182 39 2026/27 638,787 27,415 27,119 236,716 23,855 406,034 120,770 254,819 1,735,515 40 2027/28 662,939 28,452 28,144 245,666 24,757 421,386 125,336 264,454 1,801,134 41 2028/29 687,574 29,509 29,190 254,795 25,677 437,045 129,994 274,281 1,868,065 42 2029/30 712,70Z 30,587 30,257 Z64,107 26,615 453,017 134,745 284,305 1,936,335 43 2030/31 738,333 31,687 31,345 273,605 27,572 469,309 139,591 294,529 2,005,971 44 2031132 764,476 32,809 32,455 283,293 28,548 485,927 144,534 304,958 2,077,000 45 2032/33 791,142 33,953 33,587 293,175 29,544 502,877 149,575 315,595 2,149,448 46 2033/34 818,341 35,120 34,742 303,254 30,560 520,166 154,717 326,445 2,223,345 47 2034/35 846,084 36,311 35,920 313,535 31,596 537,801 159,962 337,512 2,298,721 48 2035/36 874,382 37,526 37,121 324,022 32,653 555,788 165,312 348,800 2,375,604 49 2036/37 903,246 38,765 38,346 334,718 33,731 574,135 170,769 360,314 2,454,024 50 2037/38 51 2038/39 TOTAL 17,035,566 731.131 723,232 6,312,894 636,184 10,828,374 3,220,786 6,795,692 46,283,859 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 3,035,938 130,303 128,891 1,125,034 113,379 1,929,740 573,991 1,211,078 8,248,354 To: 2024/25 7,982,452 342,598 338,892 2,958,067 298,105 5,073,906 1,509,188 3,184,307 21,687,515 To: 2034/35 15,257,938 654,840 647,765 5,654,154 569,800 9,698,451 2,884,705 6,086,578 41,454,231 To: 2038/39 17.035.566 731.131 723.232 6.312.894 636.184 10.828.374 3.220.786 6.795.692 46.283.859 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Year Fiscal (N) Year 18 2005/06 19 2006/07 20 2007/08 21 2008/09 22 2009/10 23 2010/11 24 2011/12 25 2012/13 26 2013/14 27 2014115 28 2015/16 29 2016/17 30 2017/18 31 2018119 32 2019/20 33 2020/21 34 2021122 35 2022/2-3 36 2023124 37 2024/25 38 2025126 39 2026/27 40 2027/28 41 2028/29 42 2029130 43 2030/31 44 2031/32 45 2032/33 46 2033/34 47 2034135 48 2035/36 49 2036/37 50 2037/38 51 2038/39 TOTAL Cumulative To: 2014115 To: 2024125 To: 2034135 To: 2038/39 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Attachment Table B-513 Section 33676 Inflationary Allocations Petaluma Community Development Project (In Present Value Dollars) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) County Cinnabar Old Petaluma Waugh Petaluma So. Co. Petaluma HI, Total General Adobe City City IT Junior Ele n• Unif Sec. 33676 Fund Union Elementary IT High College Failure Allocations 227,924 9,782 9,677 84,462 8,512 144,876 43,093 90,922 619,248 231,146 9,920 9,813 85,656 8,632 146,924 43,702 92,208 628,002 233,699 10,030 9,922 86,602 8,728 148,547 44,185 93,226 634,938 235,635 10,114 10,004 87,319 8,800 149,777 44,550 93,998 640,196 237,000 10,173 10,062 87,826 8,851 150,645 44,809 94,543 643,909 237,843 10,208 10,097 88,138 8,882 151,181 44,968 94,879 646,197 238,203 10,224 10,113 88,272 8,896 151,410 45,036 95,022 647,175 238,122 10,220 10,109 88,241 8,893 151,358 45,020 94,990 646,954 237,635 10,199 10,089 88,061 8,875 151,048 44,928 94,796 645,632 236,778 10,162 10,053 87,744 8,843 150,504 44,766 94,454 643,303 235,583 10,111 10,001 87,301 8,798 149,744 44,540 93,977 640,056 234,081 10,047 9,938 86,744 8,742 148,789 44,256 93,378 635,973 232,299 9,970 9,862 86,083 8,675 147,657 43,919 92,667 631,13Z 230,264 9,882 9,776 85,329 8,599 146,363 43,534 91,856 625,604 228,001 9,785 9,680 84,491 8,515 144,925 43,106 90,953 619,457 225,533 9,679 9,575 83,576 8,422 143,356 42,640 89,968 612,751 222,882 9,565 9,462 82,593 8,323 141,671 42,138 88,910 605,546 220,066 9,445 9,343 81,550 8,218 139,881 41,606 87,787 597,896 217,105 9,318 9,217 80,453 8,108 137,999 41,046 86,606 589,851 214,016 9,185 9,086 79,308 7,992 136,036 40,462 85,374 581,459 210,815 9,048 8,950 78,122 7,873 134,001 39,857 84,096 572,762 207,517 8,906 8,810 76,900 7,750 131,905 39,234 82,781 563,802 204,136 8,761 8,666 75,647 7,623 129,756 38,594 81,432 554,615 200,684 8,613 8,520 74,368 7,494 127,561 37,94Z 80,055 545,237 197,174 8,462 8,371 73,067 7,363 125,330 37,278 78,655 535,700 193,616 8,309 8,220 71,748 7.230 123,069 36,605 77,235 526,033 190,020 8,155 8,067 70,416 7,096 120,783 35,926 75,801 516,265 186,397 7,999 7,913 69,073 6,961 118,480 35,241 74.356 506,420 182,753 7,843 7,759 67,723 6,825 116,164 34,552 72,902 496,521 179,099 7,686 7,604 66,369 6,688 113,841 33,861 71,444 486,592 175,440 7,529 7,448 65,013 6,552 111,516 33,169 69,985 476,651 171,783 7,372 7,293 63,658 6,415 109,191 32,478 68,526 466,716 6,913.249 296.706 293.498 2.561,853 258,174 4,394,289 1,307,041 2.757.783 18.782.593 2,353,985 101,033 99,939 872,321 87,911 1,496,269 445,058 939,038 6,395,554 4,613,816 198,021 195,878 1,709,748 172,304 2,932,691 872,306 1,840,514 12,535,279 6,566,027 281,804 278,757 2,433,182 245,207 4,173,582 1,241,394 2,619,272 17,839,227 6.913.249 296.706 293.498 2.561.853 258.174 4.394,289 1.307.041 2.757.783 18.782.593 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Year Fiscal (N) Year 18 2005/ 06 19 2006/07 20 2007/08 21 2008/09 22 2009/10 23 2010/ 11 24 2011/ 12 25 2012/ 13 26 2013/ 14 27 2014/15 28 2015/ 16 29 2016/ 17 30 2017/ 18 31 2018/ 19 32 2019/ 20 33 2020/ 21 34 2021/22 35 2022/ 23 36 2023/ 24 37 2024/ 25 38 2025/26 39 2026/27 40 2027/28 41 2028129 42 2029/30 43 2030/31 44 2031132 45 2032/33 46 2033/34 47 2034/35 48 2035/36 49 2036/37 50 2037/38 51 2038/39 TOTAL Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 To: 2024/ 25 To: 2034/35 To: 2038/39 Attachment Table B -6A Contractual Pass -Through Payments Petaluma Community Development Project (In Future Value, or "Actual' Dollars) (1) County General Pass -Through at 96% Levy: 28.78% 3,245,279 3,306,072 3,448,008 3,595,956 3,751,780 3,915,881 4,088,684 4,270,634 4,462,199 4,663,868 4,876,159 5,099,613 5,334,800 5,582,316 5,842,790 6,116,881 6,405,282 6,708,721 7,027,962 7,363,809 7,525,666 7,695,327 7,869,345 8,047,828 8,230,892 8,418,653 8,611,231 8,808,749 9,011,333 9,219,113 9,432,219 3,711,868 0 0 195,688,917 38,748,360 99,106,693 182,544,829 195,688,917 Petaluma Community Development Commission Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger (2) County Library Pass-through at 9690 Lew: 1.94% 233,364 238,490 249,103 260,142 271,733 283,904 296,683 310,101 324,189 338,983 354,516 370,825 387,951 405,932 424,812 444,637 465,452 487,309 510,258 534,355 546,760 559,721 573,006 586,623 600,581 614,887 629,551 644,582 659,988 675,780 691,966 272,524 0 0 14,248,708 2,806,692 7,192,739 13,284,218 14,248,708 Unadjusted Levies (3) Total County Pass -Through 3,478,643 3,544,563 3,697,111 3,856,098 4,023,513 4,199,785 4,385,367 4,580,734 4,786,388 5,002,851 5,230,675 5,470,439 5,722,750 5,988,248 6,267,602 6,561,518 6,870,735 7,196,030 7,538,221 7,898,164 8,072,426 8,255,048 8,442,351 8,634,451 8,831,473 9,033,540 9,240,782 9,453,331 9,671,321 9,894,892 10,124,186 3,984,392 0 0 209,937,625 41,555,052 106,299,433 195,829,047 209,937,625 Preliminary Report April 2006 Year Fiscal (N) Year 18 2005/06 19 2006/07 20 2007/08 21 2008/09 22 2009/10 23 2010/ 11 24 2011/ 12 25 2012/ 13 26 2013/ 14 27 2014/15 28 2015/ 16 29 2016/ 17 30 2017/ 18 31 2018/ 19 32 2019/20 33 2020/ 21 34 2021/22 35 2022/ 23 36 2023/24 37 2024/25 38 2025/26 39 2026/27 40 2027/28 41 2028/29 42 2029/30 43 2030/31 44 2031/32 45 2032/33 46 2033/34 47 2034/35 48 2035/36 49 2036/37 50 2037/38 51 2038/39 TOTAL Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 To: 2024/ 25 To: 2034/35 To: 2038/39 Attachment Table B -6B Contractual Pass -Through Payments Petaluma Community Development Project (In Present Value Dollars) (1) County General Pass -Through at 96% Levv: 28.7896 3,245,279 3,133,718 3,097,871 3,062,365 3,028,499 2,996,175 2,965,301 2,935,791 2,907,564 2,880,541 2,854,653 2,829,829 2,806,006 2,783,123 2,761,123 2,739,953 2,719,562 2,699,902 2,680,928 2,662,599 2,579,264 2,499,916 2,423,173 2,348,941 2,277,130 2,207,654 2,140,431 2,075,381 2,012,427 1,951,497 1,892,518 705,938 0 0 82,905,053 (2) County Library Pass-through at 9696 Lew: 1.94% 233,364 226,057 223,807 221,541 219,348 217,224 215,168 213,175 211,242 209,366 207,544 205,775 204,055 202,382 200,753 199,168 197,622 196,116 194,646 193,212 187,391 181,832 176,443 171,219 166,155 161,244 156,483 151,866 147,390 143,049 138,839 51,830 0 0 6,025,303 Unadjusted Levies (3) Total County Pass -Through 3,478,643 3,359,775 3,321,678 3,283,906 3,247,847 3,213,400 3,180,469 3,148,965 3,118,805 3,089,907 3,062,197 3,035,604 3,010,061 2,985,505 2,961,877 2,939,121 2,917,184 2,896,017 2,875,574 2,855,811 2,766,654 2,681,748 2,599,616 2,520,160 2,443,285 2,368,899 2,296,914 2,227,247 2,159,817 2,094,545 2,031,357 757,767 0 0 88,930,356 30,253,104 2,190,291 32,443,395 57,790,782 4,191,563 61,982,345 80,306,597 5,834,634 86,141,231 82,905,053 6,025,303 88,930,356 Present value discounted to 2005/06 at: 5.50% Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Attachment Table B -7A Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Statutory Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadjusted Levies Petaluma Community Development Project (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) (I) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) City Special Cinnabar Old Petaluma Waugh General Districts Adobe City Fund JAI Union Elementary Year Fiscal (N) Year Levy: 13.2446 Levy: 3.4596 Levy: 0.879. Levy: 1.39% Levy: 12.150,. Levy: 0.4196 18 2005106 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 2006/07 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2007/08 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2008/09 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 2009/ IO 15,134 3,949 1,000 1,587 13,894 474 23 2010/ 11 31,001 8,089 2,048 3,250 28,460 970 24 2011/ 12 47,642 12,432 3,147 4,995 43,738 1,491 25 2012/ 13 65,102 16,988 4,301 6,826 59,767 2,038 26 2013/ 14 83,426 21,769 5,511 8,747 76,589 2,611 27 2014/ 15 102,662 26,789 6,782 10,763 94,249 3,213 28 2015/ 16 122,861 32,059 8,116 12,881 112,792 3,846 29 2016/ 17 144,075 37,595 9,518 15,105 132,268 4,510 30 2017/ 18 166,359 43,410 10,990 17,442 152,725 5,207 31 2018/ 19 189,771 49,519 12,536 19,896 174,218 5,940 32 2019/ 20 274,370 61,325 15,525 24,640 215,756 7,356 33 2020/ 21 240,221 73,730 18,666 29,624 259,397 8,844 34 2021/ 22 267,390 86,764 21,965 34,861 305,254 10,408 35 2022/ 23 295,945 100,461 25,433 40,365 353,446 12,051 36 2023/ 24 325,960 114,858 29,078 46,149 404,095 13,778 37 Z024/ 25 357,512 129,989 32,908 52,229 457,331 15,593 38 2025/ 26 390,137 145,692 36,884 58,538 512,578 17,476 39 2026/ 27 407,OB4 153,865 38,953 61,822 541,333 18,457 40 2027/ 28 424,446 162,236 41,072 65,185 570,784 19,461 41 2028/ 29 442,233 170,810 43,243 68,630 600,949 20,489 42 2029/ 30 460,457 179,593 45,466 72,159 631,848 21,543 43 2030131 479,130 188,589 47,744 75,774 663,500 22,622 44 2031/32 498,262 197,806 50,077 79,477 695,925 23,728 45 2032/33 517,867 207,248 52,467 83,270 729,144 24,860 46 2033134 537,957 216,921 54,916 87,157 763,178 26,021 47 2034/35 558,544 226,833 57,426 91,140 798,049 27,209 48 2035/36 579,642 236,988 59,997 95,220 833,779 28,428 49 2036/37 209,634 86,256 21,837 34,657 303,467 10,347 50 2037/38 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 2038/39 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 8,174,824 2,992,563 757,606 1,202,387 10,528,510 358,969 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 344,967 90,016 22,789 36,168 316,696 10,798 To: 2024125 2,669,431 819,725 207,524 329,359 2,883,978 98,329 To: 2034135 7,385,549 2,669,319 675,773 1,072,510 9,391,265 320,195 To: 2038139 8,174,824 2,992,563 757,606 1,202,387 10,528,510 358,969 IAI The City's pass-through is based only on the first tier of the AB1290 pass-through. Its shares of the second and third tiers are retained by the Agency. Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Attachment Table B -7B Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Pemluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Statutory Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadjusted Levies Petaluma Community Development Project (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) Petaluma So. Co. School Petaluma Hl, Schools Total City JT Junior Services Elem-Unit EqualEation Pass-Throughs JT High College Admin. Failure Aid Year Fiscal (N) Year Lew: 18.409. Lew: 5.479. Lew: 2.01% Lew: 11.559,, Lew: 0.33`1. 18 2005/ 06 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 2006/ 07 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2007/ 08 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2008109 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 2009/ 10 21,034 6,256 2,293 13,200 373 79,193 23 2010/ 11 43,086 12,815 4,697 27,039 764 162,220 24 2011/ 12 66,215 19,694 7,219 41,554 1,174 249,301 25 2012/ 13 90,481 26,911 9,865 56,783 1,605 340,665 26 2013/ 14 115,949 34,486 12,641 72,765 2,056 436,551 27 2014/ 15 142,684 42,438 15,556 89,544 2,531 537,211 28 2015/ 16 170,757 50,787 18,617 107,161 3,028 642,907 29 2016/ 17 200,241 59,557 21,831 125,664 3,551 753,915 30 2017/ 18 231,212 68,768 25,208 145,101 4,101 870,522 31 2018/ 19 263,750 78,446 28,755 165,520 4,678 993,030 32 2019/ 20 326,635 97,149 35,611 204,985 5,793 1,209,146 33 2020/ 21 392,704 116,800 42,815 246,447 6,965 1,436,212 34 2021/ 22 462,128 137,448 50,383 290,015 8,196 1,674,812 35 2022/ 23 535,085 159,148 58,338 335,800 9,490 1,925,562 36 2023/ 24 611,763 181,954 66,698 383,921 10,850 2,189,102 37 2024/ 25 692,358 205,924 75,484 434,499 12,279 2,466,107 38 2025/ 26 775,996 230,800 84,603 486,988 13,763 2,753,455 39 2026/ 27 819,529 243,748 89,349 514,307 14,535 2,902,982 40 2027/ 28 864,115 257,009 94,210 542,288 15,326 3,056,131 41 2028/ 29 909,782 270,592 99,189 570,947 16,136 3,213,000 42 2029/ 30 956,560 284,505 104,289 600,303 16,965 3,373,688 43 2030/ 31 1,004,479 298,757 109,513 630,375 17,815 3,538,297 44 2031/ 32 1,053,568 313,357 114,865 661,182 18,686 3,706,932 45 2032/33 1,103,858 328,315 120,348 692,743 19,578 3,879,699 46 2033/34 1,155,383 343,640 125,966 725,078 20,492 4,056,708 47 2034/35 1,208,174 359,341 131,721 758,207 21,428 4,238,072 48 2035/36 1,262,265 375,429 137,619 792,153 22,387 4,423,906 49 2036/37 459,421 136,643 50,088 288,316 8,148 1,608,813 50 2037/38 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 2038/39 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 15,939,213 4,740,717 1,737,773 10,002,887 282,693 56,718,142 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 479,449 142,600 52,272 300,885 8,503 1,805,142 To: 2024/ 25 4,366,082 1,298,581 476,012 2,739,999 77,435 15,966,456 To: 2034135 14,217,526 4,228,644 1,550,066 8,922,417 252,158 50,685,422 To: 2038/ 39 15,939,213 4,740,717 1,737,773 10,002,887 282,693 56,718,142 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Pemluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Attachment Table B -7C Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Statutory Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadjusted Levies Petaluma Community Development Project (In Present Value or Constant 2005/06 Dollars) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) City Special Cinnabar Old Petaluma Waugh General Districts Adobe City Fund'Al Union Elementary Year Fiscal (N) Year Levv: 13.24% Levv: 3.459,, Levy: 0.8796 Levy: 1.39% Levy: 12.159. Levv: 0.419. IS 2005106 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 2006107 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2007/08 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2008/09 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 2009/ 10 12,216 3,188 807 1,281 11,215 382 23 2010/ 11 23,720 6,189 1,567 2,487 21,776 742 24 2011/ 12 34,552 9,016 2,283 3,623 31,721 1,082 25 2012/ 13 44,753 11,678 2,956 4,692 41,086 1,401 26 2013/ 14 54,360 14,185 3,591 5,699 49,905 1,702 27 2014/ 15 63,407 16,546 4,189 6,648 58,211 1,985 28 2015/ 16 71,927 18,769 4,752 7,541 66,032 2,251 29 2016/ 17 79,949 20,862 5,281 8,382 73,397 2,502 30 2017/ 18 87,502 22,833 5,780 9,174 80,331 2,739 31 2018/ 19 94,612 24,688 6,250 9,919 86,858 2,961 32 2019/ 20 101,305 28,980 7,337 11,644 101,960 3,476 33 2020/ 21 107,603 33,026 8,361 13,270 116,193 3,962 34 2021122 113,529 36,838 9,326 14,801 129,605 4,419 35 2022/ 23 119,102 40,430 10,235 16,245 142,243 4,850 36 2023/ 24 124,343 43,814 11,092 17,604 154,148 5,256 37 2024/ 25 129,269 47,001 11,899 18,885 165,361 5,638 38 2025126 133,711 49,933 12,641 20,063 175,675 5,990 39 2026127 132,246 49,985 12,654 20,084 175,858 5,996 40 2027/ 28 130,698 49,957 12,647 20,072 175,759 5,992 41 2028129 129,076 49,855 12,621 20,031 175,401 5,980 42 2029130 127,389 49,686 12,579 19,963 174,805 5,960 43 2030/31 125,644 49,454 12,520 19,870 173,992 5,932 44 2031132 123,849 49,167 12,447 19,755 172,981 5,898 45 2032133 122,012 48,828 12,362 19,619 171,790 5,857 46 2033134 120,138 48,443 12,264 19,464 170,434 5,811 47 2034135 118,232 48,016 12,156 19,292 168,931 5,760 48 2035/36 116,302 47,550 12,038 19,105 167,293 5,704 49 2036/37 39,869 16,404 4,153 6,591 57,714 1,968 50 2037/38 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 2038/39 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2,681,314 935,322 236,789 375,805 3,290,674 112,195 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 233,009 60,802 15,393 24,430 213,913 7,293 To: 2024/ 25 1,262,149 378,043 95,707 151,895 1,330,041 45,348 To: 2034/ 35 2,525,143 871,367 220,598 350,108 3,065,666 104,524 To: 2038/39 2,681,314 935,322 236,789 375,805 3,290,674 112,195 [A] The City's pass-through is based only on the first tier of the AB1290 pass-through. Its shares of the second and third tiers are retained by the Agency. Future value based on 2005/06 values escalated annually it: 5.5% Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Attachment Table B -7 1l Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Statutory Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadjusted Levies Petaluma Community Development Project (In Present Value, 2005/06 Dollars) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) Petaluma So. Co. School Petaluma HI, Schools Total City JT Junior Services Elem- Unil Equalization Pass-Throughs JT High College Admin. Failure Aid Year Fiscal (N) Year Levy: 18.40% Levy: 5.47% Levy: 2.0196 Levy: 11.5596 Levy: 0.3396 18 2005/ 06 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 2006/ 07 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2007108 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 2008/ 09 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 2009/ 10 16,979 5,050 1,851 10,655 301 63,926 23 2010/ 11 32,967 9,805 3,594 20,689 585 124,120 24 2011/ 12 48,022 14,283 5,236 30,137 852 180,805 25 2012/ 13 62,200 18,500 6,781 39,035 1,103 234,186 26 2013/ 14 75,552 22,471 8,237 47,414 1,340 284,456 27 2014/ 15 88,126 26,211 9,608 55,305 1,563 331,797 28 20151 16 99,967 29,733 10,899 62,735 1,773 376,378 29 2016117 111,116 33,049 12,114 69,732 1,971 418,355 30 2017/ 18 121,613 36,171 13,259 76,320 2,157 457,878 31 2018/ 19 131,496 39,110 14,336 82,522 2,332 495,086 32 2019/ 20 154,358 45,910 16,829 96,869 2,738 571,405 33 2020121 175,905 52,319 19,178 110,392 3,120 643,327 34 2021/ 22 196,211 58,358 21,392 123,135 3,480 711,094 35 2022/ 23 215,343 64,048 23,478 135,142 3,819 774,936 36 2023/ 24 233,367 69,409 25,443 146,453 4,139 835,068 37 2024/ 25 250,342 74,458 27,294 157,106 4,440 891,693 38 2025126 265,956 79,102 28,996 166,905 4,717 943,689 39 2026/ 27 266,233 79,184 29,026 167,079 4,722 943,067 40 2027128 266,083 79,140 29,010 166,984 4,719 941,061 41 2028129 265,541 78,978 28,951 166,644 4,710 937,787 42 2029130 264,639 78,710 28,852 166,078 4,694 933,353 43 2030131 263,408 78,344 28,718 165,306 4,672 927,861 44 2031/32 261,878 77,889 28,551 164,345 4,645 921,405 45 2032/33 260,074 77,352 28,355 163,213 4,613 914,075 46 2033134 258,022 76,742 28,131 161,926 4,576 905,951 47 2034/35 255,746 76,065 27,883 160,497 4,536 897,113 48 2035136 253,266 75,328 27,612 158,941 4,492 887,630 49 2036/37 87,374 25,987 9,526 54,833 1,550 305,970 50 2037/38 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 2038/ 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4.981,782 1,481,705 543,139 3,126,391 88,355 17.853.472 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 323,846 96,320 35,307 203,234 5,744 1,219,290 To: 2024/ 25 2,013,562 598,883 219,529 1,263,641 35,712 7,394,509 To: 2034135 4,641,142 1,380,391 506,001 2,912,617 82,314 16,659,871 To: 2038139 4,981,782 1,481,705 543,139 3,126,391 88,355 17,853,472 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table C -1A Summary of Projected Tax Increment From 2005/6 Through End of Project Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Original and Added Areas Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Nominal Constant Dollars 2005/06 Dollars County Distribution of Basic Incremental Taxes Incremental Tax Revenues $230,898,147 $86,862,857 Less: County Property Tax Admin Fee 3,925,268 1,476,669 Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 226,972,878 85,386,188 TI Available to Agency After Obligations Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 226,972,878 85,386,188 Less: Pass-Throughs to Taxing Entities 62,548,358 21,073,393 Less: State ERAF Payment 100 100 TI Available to Agency After Obligations 164,424,420 64,312,695 Projected Use of TI Funds Agency Administration (Non-Hsg) 3,074,272 1,302,480 TI Available for Housing Programs 46,179,629 17,372,571 TI Available for Non -Housing Projects 115,170,518 45,637,644 Total TI Funds Used by Agency 164,424,420 64,312,695 Subtotal, TI for Housing & Projects 161,350,147 63,010,215 Cumulative TI for Housing Programs 2014/15 6,511,150 4,873,873 2024/25 22,297,038 12,065,941 2034/35 34,705,893 15,657,717 2046/47 46,179,629 17,372,571 Cumulative TI for Non -Housing Projects 2014/15 19,360,195 14,573,793 2024/25 59,893,100 33,134,223 2034/35 89,882,045 41,842,716 2046/47 115,170,518 45,637,644 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table C -1B Summary of Projected Tax Increment by Subarea From 2005/6 Through End of Project Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Original and Added Areas Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Original Added Total Amended Area Area Area Future Value Dollars County Distribution of Basic Incremental Taxes Incremental Tax Revenues $102,794,220 $128,103,926 $230,898,147 Less: County Property Tax Admin Fee 1,747,502 2.177,767 3,925,268 Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 101,046,719 125,926,159 226,972,878 TI Available to Agency After Obligations Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 101,046,719 125,926,159 226,972,878 Less: Pass-Throughs to Taxing Entities 23,829,170 38,719,189 62,548,358 Less: State ERAF Payment 100 0 100 TI Available to Agency After Obligations 77,217,449 87,206,971 164,424,420 Projected Use of TI Funds Agency Administration (Non-Hsg) 1,445,137 1,629,135 3,074,272 TI Available for Housing Programs 20,558,844 25,620,785 46,179,629 TI Available for Non -Housing Projects 55,213,467 59,957,051 115,170,518 Total TI Funds Used by Agency 77,217,449 87,206,971 164,424,420 Subtotal, TI for Housing & Projects 75,772_,311 85,577,836 161,350,147 Present Value Dollars County Distribution of Basic Incremental Taxes Incremental Tax Revenues 49,842,077 37,020,779 86,862,857 Less: County Property Tax Admin Fee 847,315 629,353 1,476,669 Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 48,994,762 36,391,426 85,386,188 TI Available to Agency After Obligations Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 48,994,762 36,391,426 85,386,188 Less: Pass-Throughs to Taxing Entities 10,664,365 10,409,028 21,073,393 Less: State ERAF Payment 100 0 100 TI Available to Agency After Obligations 38,330,297 25,982,398 64,312,695 Projected Use of TI Funds Agency Administration (Non-Hsg) 781,536 520,944 1,302,480 TI Available for Housing Programs 9,968,415 7,404,156 17,372,571 TI Available for Non -Housing Projects 27,580,345 18,057,2995 64 . 37,644 Total TI Funds Used by Agency 38,330,297 25,982,398 64,312,695 Subtotal, TI for Housing & Projects 37,548,761 25,461,455 63,010,215 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table C-2 Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Orijdnal and Added Areas (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Repan Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 County Distribution of Bas c Increment: Taxes Aeencv Oblinxt ons I Net Tax Increment Net To. Increment (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Available for Available for lncremcntal County Net Talcs Pass- state Agency Marsha Proernms Non-Houfne Pmiects Year Fiscal Tax Admin Remitted Through ERAF Admin (7) (8) ( (9) (10) (N) Year Revenues' Fee to Agency Payments Payment! Expenses Annual Cumulative Annual Cumulative 0 2005/06 1,404,578 23,878 1,380,701 140,813 100 61,3371 280,916 280,9161 897,535 897,535 1 2006/ 07 1,753,709 29,813 1,723,896 209,416 0 63,177 350,742 631,657 1,100,561 1,998,096 2 2007/ 08 2,140,918 36,396 2,104,523 281,237 0 67,115 428,184 1,059,841 1,327,988 3,326,084 3 2008/09 2,545,643 43,276 2,502,367 360,756 0 67,024 509,129 1,568,970 1,565,459 4,891,543 4 2009/ 10 2,968,953 50,472 2,918,481 443,950 0 69,035 593,791 2,162,760 1,811,705 6,703,248 5 2010/ 11 3,411,525 57,996 3,353,529 530,955 0 71,106 682,305 2,845,065 2,069,164 8,772,412 6 2011/ 12 3,874,057 65,859 3,808,198 621,907 0 73,239 774,811 3,619,877 2,338,240 11,110,652 7 2012/ 13 4,332,590 73,654 4,258,936 783,152 0 75,436 866,518 4,486,394 2,533,829 13,644,481 8 2013/ 14 4,811,809 81,801 4,730,008 943,196 0 77,699 962,362 5,448,756 2,746,751 16,391,232 9 2014/ 15 5,311,968 90,303 5,221,665 1,110,278 0 80,030 1,062,394 6,511,150 2,968,962 19,360,195 10 20151 16 5,833,815 99,175 5,734,640 1,284,652 0 82,431 1,166,763 7,677,913 3,200,795 22,560,990 II 2016/ 17 6,378,122 108,428 6,269,694 1,466,575 0 84,904 1,275,624 8,953,537 3,442,590 26,003,579 12 2017/ 18 6,945,685 118,077 6,827,608 1,656,319 0 87,451 1,389,137 10,342,674 3,694,701 29,698,281 13 20181 19 7,537,327 128,135 7,409,192 1,854,158 0 90,075 1,507,465 11,850,140 3,957,494 33,655,775 14 20191 20 8,153,896 138,616 8,015,280 2,060,380 0 92,777 1,630,779 13,480,919 4.231,343 37,887,118 15 20201 21 8,361,782 142,150 8,219,631 2,246,315 0 95,560 1,672,356 15,153,275 4,205,400 42,092,518 16 20211 22 8,583,342 145,917 8,437,425 2,321,434 0 98,427 1,716,668 16,869,944 4,300,895 46,393,413 17 2022/ 23 8,810,441 149,777 8,660,664 2,398,431 0 101,380 1,762,088 18,632,032 4,398,764 50,792,178 18 2023/ 24 9,043,218 153,735 8489,483 2,477,353 0 104,421 1,808,644 20,440,675 4,499,065 55,291,242 19 2024/ 25 9,281,814 157,791 9,124,023 2,558,249 0 107,554 1,856,363 22,297,038 4,601,858 59,893,100 20 2025/ 26 9,526,375 161,948 9,364,427 2,641,166 0 110,781 1,905,275 24,202,313 4,707,205 64,600,305 21 20261 27 9,777,050 166,210 9,610,840 2,726,157 0 114,104 1,955,410 26,157,723 4,815,170 69,415,475 22 2027/ 28 10,033,992 170,578 9,863,414 2,813,272 0 117,527 2,006,798 28,164,522 4,925,817 74,341,292 23 2028/ 29 10,297,358 175,055 10,122,302 2,902,565 0 121,053 2,059,472 30,223,993 5,039,213 79,380,505 24 2029130 3,483,300 59,216 3,424,083 1,034,796 0 41,027 696,660 30,920,653 1451,601 81,032,106 25 2030/31 3,580,640 60,871 3,519,769 1,067,862 0 42,258 716,128 31,636,781 1,693,521 82,725,627 26 2031/32 3,680,414 62,567 3,617,847 1,101,754 0 43,526 736,083 32,372,864 1,736,484 84.462,111 27 2032133 3,782,683 64,306 3,718,377 1,146,019 0 44,832 756,537 33,129,400 1,770,990 86,233,101 28 2033/34 3,887,508 66,088 3,821,420 1,191,390 0 46,177 777,502 33,906,902 1,806,352 88,039,453 29 2034/35 3,994,954 67,914 3,927,039 1,237,895 0 47,562 798,991 34,705,893 1,842,592 89,882,045 30 2035/36 4,105,086 69,786 4,035,299 1,285,563 0 48,989 821,017 35,526,910 1,879,730 91,761,775 31 2036/37 4,217,971 71,706 4,146,265 1,334,423 0 50,458 843,594 36,370,504 1,917,790 93,679,565 32 2037/38 4,333,678 73,673 4,260,006 1,384,504 0 51,972 866,736 37,237,240 1,956,794 95,636,360 33 2038/39 4,452,278 75,689 4,376,589 1,435,837 0 53,531 890,456 38,127,695 1,996,766 97,633,125 34 2039/ 40 4,573,843 77,755 4,496,088 1,488,453 0 55,137 914,769 39,042,464 2,037,729 99,670,854 35 2040/41 4,698,447 79,874 4,618,574 1,542,385 0 56,791 939,689 39,982,153 2,079,708 101,750,562 36 2041/ 42 4,826,167 82,045 4,744,122 1,597,665 0 58,495 965,233 40,947,387 2,122,728 103,873,290 37 2042/ 43 4,957,079 84,270 4,872,809 1,654,327 0 60,25C 991,416 41,938,803 2,166,815 106,040,105 38 2043144 5,091,264 86,551 5,004,712 1,712.406 0 62,057 1,018,253 42,957,055, 2,211,996 108,252,101 39 2044145 5,228,804 88,890 5,139,914 1,771,937 0 63,919 1,045,761 44,002,816 2,258,297 110,510,399 40 2045146 5,369,782 91,286 5,278,496 1,832,956 0 65,837 1,073,956 45,076,772 2,305,747 112,816,145 41 2046147 5.514,284 93.743 5.420,5421 1.895.500 0 67.812 1,102,857 46.179,629 2.354373 115.170.518 TOTAL 230,898,147 3,925,268 226,972,878 62,548,358 100 3,074,272 46,179,629 115,170,518 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 32,555,750 553,448 32,002,302 5,425,660 100 705,197 6,511,150 19,360,195 - To: 2024125 111,485,191 1,895,248 109,589,943 25,749,527 100 1,650,177 22,297,038 59,893,100 To: 2034/35 173,529,464 2,950,001 170,579,463 43,612,402 100 2,379,023 34,705,893 _ 89,882,045 To: 2046/47 230.898.147 3,925268 226.972.878 62.548358 100 3,074,2721 46.179,629 - 115,170.518 Based on revenues from Baste Tax Increment (L09u), exclusive of hone overrides. ' PCDC's total ERAFshilt lot FY 2004/05 was §918,641. This analysis assumes the PCDC is required to make the same amount for the FY 2005/06 ERAF shift and the PCDC allocates most of the total ERAF shift for the Petaluma Community Development Project Area. Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Repan Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Table C-3 Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger- CBD Original and Added Areas (In Present Value) County Distribution of Basi lnrremenml Taxes (1) (2) (3) lncremenml County Net Tax. Year Fiscal Tax Admin Remitted (N) Year Revenues' Fee m Aeencv 0 2005/ 06 1,404,578 23,878 1,380,701 1 2006/ 07 1,662,283 28,259 1,634,024 2 2007/ 08 1,923,513 32,700 1,890,813 3 2008/ 09 2,167,904 36,854 2,131,050 4 2009/ 10 2,396,589 40,742 2,355,847 5 2010/ 11 6 2011/ 12 7 2012_/ 13 8 2013/ 14 9 2014/ 15 10 2015/ 16 Il 2016/17 12 2017/18 13 2018/ 19 14 2019/20 15 2020/21 16 2021/22 17 2022/23 18 2023124 19 2024/25 20 2025/26 21 2026/27 22 2027/28 23 2028/ 29 24 2029/30 25 2030/31 26 2031/32 27 2032/33 28 2033/34 29 2034135 30 2035/36 31 2036137 32 2037/38 33 2038139 34 2039140 35 2040/41 36 2041142 37 2042143 38 2043/ 44 39 2044/45 40 2045/46 41 2046/47 TOTAL Cumulative To 2014/ 15 To: 2024125 To: 2034/35 To 2046/ 47 Aeee_v Oblieat ons (4) (5) (6) Pass- 8mte Agency Through ERAF Admin Payments Pavmen2 Exornses 140,813 100 61,337 198,499 0 59,883 252,678 0 60,299 307,225 0 57,079 358,364 0 55,726 2,610,275 44,375 2,565,9001 406,252 2.809.643 47,764 2,761,879 451,035 2,978,382, 50,632 2,927,749 538,368 3,135,369 53,301 3,082,068 614,585 3,280,827, 55,774 3,225,053 685,740 3,415,294 111 58,060 3,357,234 752,074 3,539,2871 60,168 3,479,119 813,818 3,653,3021 62,106 3,591,196 871,193 3,757,8151 63,883 3,693,932 924,410 3,853 282111 65,506 3,787,776 973,673 3,745,518' 63,674 3,681,845 1,006,199 3,644,325 61,954 3,582,371 985,637 3,545,731 60,277 3,485,454 965,240 3,449,679 58,645 3,391,035 945,026 3,356,110 57,054 3,299,056 925,009 3,264,965 55,504 3,209,460 905,204 3,176,188 53,995 3,122,193 885,624 3,089,724 52,525 3,037,198 866,279 3,005,517 51,094 2,954,423 847,179 963,678 16,383 947,295 286,283 938,965 15,962 923,002 280,029 914,814 15,552 899,262 273,855 891,217 15,151 876,066 270,007 868,165 14,759 853,406 266,063 845,650 14,376 831,273 262,037 823,661 14,002 809,659 257.941 802,190 13,637 788,5531 253,786 781,228 13,281 767,947 249,583 760,766 12,933 747,833 245,343 740,794 12,594 728,201 241,075 721,304 12,262 709,042 236,786 702,286 11,939 690.347 232,486 683,730 11,623 672,107 228,182 665,629 11,316 654.313 223,879 647,972 11,016 636,957 219,585 630,751 10,723 620,029 215,305 613,958 10,437 603.520 211,044 86,862,857 1,476,669 85,386,IBB 21,073,393 54,406 53,116 51,858 50,629 49,429 48,258 47,114 45,998 44,908 43,844 41, 11,081 0 10,563 0 10,312 0 10,068 0 9,829 0 9,596 0 9,369 0 9,147 0 8,930 0 8,719 0 8,512 0 8,310 0 8,113 0 7,921 0 7,733 0 7.550 100 1,302,480 Net Tax Increment Available for Housine Proctitis (7) IB) Annual Cumulative 280,916 280,916 332,457 613,3721 384,703 998,075 433,581 1,431,656 479,318 1,910,974 522,055 2,433,028 561,929 2,994,957 595,676 3,590,633 627,074 i 17,707 656,165 4,873,873 683,059 5,556,932 707,857 6,264,789 730,660 6,995,449 751,563 7,747,012 770,656 8,517,668 749,104 9,266,772 728,865 9,995,637 709,146 10,704,783 689,936 11,394,719 671,222 12,065,941 652,993 12,718,934 635,238 13,354,172 617,945 13,972,116 601,103 14,573,220 192,736 14,765,955 187,793 14,953,748 182,963 15,136,711 178,243 15,314,954 173,633 15,488,588 169,130 15,657,717 164,732 15,822,450 160,438 15,982,888 156,246 16,139,133 152,153 16,291,287 148,159 16,439,445 144,261 16,583,706 140,457 16,724,163 136,746 16,860,909 133,126 16,994,035 129,594 17,123,630 126,150 17,249,780 122.792 17.372,571 17,372,571 Not Tax Increment Available for Non-Hmsi m Proircis (9) (10) Annual Cumulative 897,535 897,535 1,043,186 1,940,721 1,193,134 3,133,855 1,333,166 4,467,021 1,462,439 5,929,460 1,583,188 1,695,799 1,741,848 1,789,780 1,833,718 1,873,843 1,910,329 1,943,345 1,973,051 1,999,603 1,883,738 1,826,079 1,770,267 1,716,240 1,663,935 1,613,295 1,564,264 1,516,785 1,470,809 456,926 444,098 431,625 417,253 403,398 390,039 377,157 364,733 352,750 341,190 330,037 319,276 308,891 298,869 289,195 279,856 270,840 262.135 45,637,644 7,512,648 9,208,447 10,950,295 12,740,074 14,573,793 16,447,636 18,357,965 20,301,310 22,274,360 24,273,964 26,157,701 27,983,780 29,754,047 31,470,287 33,134,223 34,747,518 36,311,782 37,828,567 39,299,376 39,756,302 40,200,400 40,632,026 41,049,279 41,452,677 41,842,716 42,219,872 42,584,605 42,937,354 43,278,544 43,608,581 43,927,857 44,236,749 44,535,618 44,824,813 45,104,669 45,375,509 45.637,644 24,369,364 414,279 23,955,085 3,953,559 100 553,7601 4,873,873 14,573,793 - 60,329,706 1,025,605 59,304,101 13,115,838 100 987,999 12,065,941 33,134,223 78,288,587 1,330,906 76,957,681 18,258,399 100 1,198,749 15,657,717 41,842,716 86,862.857 1.476.669 85.386,1881 21.073.393 IOO 1.302.480 1 17.372.571 45.637.644 ' Based an revenues ftom Basic Tax Increment (1.09id, exclusive of bond overrides. PC19C's until ERAF shift for FY 2004105 was $918,641.7his emlysis assumes the PCDC is required to make the same amount for the FY 2005/06 ERAF shift and the PCDC allocates most of the total ERAF shift far the Peudmna Community Development Project Area. Present value discount rote: 5.5% Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary depart Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table D-1 Summary of Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Original Area Summary of Assumptions Growth Assumptions FY 2005/06 Secured Assessed Value: $91,865,600 FY 2005/06 State Boanl Asscsscd Value: $0 FY 2005/06 Unsecured Assessed Value: $9.801.784 FY 2005/06 Total Assessed Value: $101,667,384 FY Z005/06 Unitary Payments (En.); $0 Annual Inflationary Adjustment-. 295 of Secured AV 781,536 Reassessed Property Assessments: 0.59% of Secured AV 9,968,415 New Developpment Assumptions: $20 million in conemnt FY 2005/06 dollars per year from FY 2005/06 to FY 2019/20 Annual Growth in State Bumd Assessed Value: 0.0% Annual Growth in Unsecured Assessed Value: 0.096 Annual Growth in Unitary Payments: 0.011% Tax Increment Generation Project Amended between 12/2/04 and 8/20/05 Property Tax Rate:1,096 County Properry Tax Admin Fee: t,7% Pass -Through Payments and Housing Sco-Aside are calculated based on Incremental Tax Revenues. Sponsoring Community City receives pass-through City's Unadjusted Levy Within Project Area: 16.440,6 Agency Administration Cost Cost in FY 2005/06: $45,108 Annual Increase: 3.0% (Present Value Discount Rate Present value discounted to FY 2005/06 at; 5.5%I Historical Information Original Base Assessed Value (Secured, Unsecured and Utility) 18,832,170 Year First Plan Limit was Reached: 2001102 Tax Increment Projections From FY 2005/06 Through End of Proiect County Distribution of Basic Incremental Taxes Incremental Tax Revenues Less: County Property Tax Admin Fee Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency TI Available to Agency After Obligations Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency Less: Pass-Throughs to Taxing Entities Less: State ERAF Payments TI Available to Agency After Obligations Projected Use of TI Funds Agency Administration (Non-Hsg) TI Available for Housing Programs TI Available for Non -Housing Projects Total TI Funds Used by Agency Subtaml, TI for Hotaing & Projects Cumulative TI for Housing Programs 2014/ 15 2024/ 25 2029130 Cumulative TI for Non -Housing Projects 2014115 2024/25 2029/30 Petaluma Community Development Commission Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Constant Nominal Dollars* FY 2005/06 Dollars* $102,794,220 $49,842,077 1,747,502 847.315 101,046,719 48,994,762 101,046,719 48,994,762 23,829,170 10,664,365 100 100 77,217,449 38,330,297 1,445,137 781,536 20,558,844 9,968,415 55.213.467 27.580.345 77,217,449 38,330,297 75,772,311 37,548,761 4,546,346 3,411,632 15,233,172 8,283,814 20,558,844 9,968,415 13,976, 502 10,561,049 41,933,637 23,378,750 55,213,467 27,580,345 Preliminary Report April 2006 Appendix Table D -2A Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Plan Amendments St Fiscal Merger - CDD Original Area (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 County Distribu ion I, of Has c Increments Taxes Aaer,cv Oblieations 1 Net Tax Increment Net Tax Increment (1) 1 (2) (3) (4) (5)(6) Available for Available for Incremental County Net Taxes Pass- State Agency Housine Proerams Non-Housine Projects Year Fiscal Tax Admin Remitted Through ERAF Admin (6) (7) I (8) (9) (N) Year Revenues Fee to Aecncv Pxvmenls Payment' Expenses I Annual Cumulative Annual Cumulative 1976/ 77 28 2004105 29 2005/ 06 1,032,945 17,560 1,015,385 66,486 100 45,108 206,589 206,589 697,102 697,102 30 2006/ 07 1,262,027 21,454 1,240,572 111,080 45,464 252,405 458,994 831,623 1,528,725 31 2007/ 08 1,523,674 25,902 1,497,7711 157,788 46,311 304,735 763,729 988,937 2,517,663 32 2008/ 09 1,797,121 30,551 1,766,5701 211,051 47,316 359,424 1,123,153 1,148,778 3,666,441 33 2009/ 10 2,083,233 35,415 2,047,818 266,806 48,440 416,647 1,539,800 1,315,925 4,982,366 34 2010/ 11 2,382,470 40,502 2,341,968 325,144 49,657 476,494 2,016,294 1,490,673 6,473,040 35 2011/ 12 2,695,311 45,820 2,649,491 386,158 50,955 539,062 2,555,356 1,673,316 8,146,355 36 2012/ 13 2,997,568 50,959 2,946,610 494,722 52,192 599,514 3,154,870 1,800,182 9,946,538 37 2013/ 14 3,313,691 56,333 3,257,358 599,778 53,508 662,738 3,817,608 1,941,334 11,887,872 38 2014/ 15 3,643,690 61,943 3,581,747 709,483 54,896 728,738 4,546,346 2,088,630 13,976,502 39 2015/ 16 3,988,061 67,797 3,920,2641 824,005 56,351 797,612 5,343,958 2,242,296 16,218,799 40 2016/ 17 4,347,317 73,904 4,273,413 943,515 57,870 869,463 6,213,422 2,402,564 18,6Z1,363 41 2017/ 18 4,721,987 80,274 4,641,713 1,068,191 59,453 944,397 7,157,819 2,569,671 21,191,034 42 2018/ 19 5,112,617 86,914 5,025,703 1,198,218 61,098 1,022,523 8,180,343 2,743,863 23,934,897 43 2019/ 20 5,519,771 93,836 5,425,935 1,333,784 62,805 1,103,954 9,284,297 2,925,391 26,860,289 44 2020/ 21 5,654,371 96,124 5,558,246 1,475,085 64,619 1,130,874 10,415,171 2,887,668 29,747,957 45 2021/ 22 5,797,988 98,566 5,699,422 1,523,727 66,487 1,159,598 11,574,768 2,949,610 32,697,567 46 2022/ 23 5,945,195 101,068 5,844,127 1,573,586 68,410 1,189,039 12,763,807 3,013,092 35,710,659 47 2023/ 24 6,096,082 103,633 5,992,4491 1,624,690 70,391 1,219,216 13,983,024 3,078,151 38,788,810 48 2024/ 25 6,250,742 106,263 6,144,479 1,677,073 72,431 1,250,148 15,233,172 3,144,827 41,933,637 49 2025/ 26 6,409,268 108,958 6,300,311 1,730,764 74,532 1,281,854 16,515,026 3,213,160 45,146,797 50 2026/ 27 6,571,757 111,720 6,460,038 1,785,799 76,696 1,314,351 17,829,377 3,283,191 48,429,989 51 2027/ 28 6,738,309 114,551 6,623,758 1,842,209 78,925 1,347,662 19,177,039 3,354,962 51,784,951 52 2028/ 29 6,909,024 117,453 6,791,571 1,900,O29 81,221 1,381,805 20,558,844 3,428,517 55,213,467 53 2029/ 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 20.558.844 0 55.213.467 TOTAL 102,794,220 1,747,502 101,046,719 23,829,170 100 1,445,137 20,558,844 -- - 55,213,467 --- Cumulative - - - - - To: 2014/ 15 22,731,730 386,439 22,345,291 3,328,496 100 493,847 4,546,346 -_ -= 13,976,502 _ To: 2024/ 25 76,165,861 1,294,820 74,871,042 16,570,369 100 1,133,763 15,233,172 41,933,637 To: 2029/ 30 102.794.220 1.747.502 101.046.719 23.829.170 100 1.445.137 20,558,844 55.213.467 - ' Based on revenues from Basic Tax Increment (1.090), exclusive of bond overrides. ' PCDC's total ERAF shift for FY 2004/05 was $918,641. This analysis assumes the PCDC is required to mike the same amount for the FY 2005/06 ERAF shift and the PCDC allocates most of the total ERAF shift for the Petaluma Community Development Project Area. Assumptions: County Admin Fee as a 0,0 of Incremental Tax Revenues: 1.79a Pass -Through Payments and Housing Set -Aside are calculated based on Incremental Tax Revenues. Agency Administration Annual Increase: 396 TI for Housing Programs as a 96 of Incremental Tax Revenues: 20% Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table D -21i Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Plan Amendments A Fiscal Merger - CBD Original Arca (In Present Value or Constant 2005/06 Dollars) Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 County Distribuion of Basic Incremenmi Taxes Aeenc , Oblieations Net Tax Increment Net Tax Increment (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Available far Available for Incremental County Net Taxes Pass- State Agency Housine P comas Non-Housine Projects Year Fiscal Tax Admin Remitted Through ERAF Admin (6) (7) (8) (9) (N) Year Revenues' Fee to Auenev Payments Pxvmc-0 Expenses Annual Cumulative Annual Cumulative 1976/ 77 28 2004/ 05 29 2005/ 06 1,032,945 17,560 1,015,385 66,486 100 45,108 206,589 206,589 697,102 697,102 30 2006/ 07 1,196,234 20,336 1,175,898 105,2B9 0 43,094 239,247 445,836 788,268 1,485,371 31 2007/ 08 1,368,948 23,272 1,345,676 141,765 0 41,608 273,790 719,625 888,513 2,373,884 32 2008/ 09 1,530,453 26,018 1,504,435 179,734 0 40,295 306,091 1,025,716 978,315 3,352,199 33 2009/ 10 1,681,620 28,588 1,653,033 215,370 0 39,101 336,324 1,362,040 1,062,237 4,414,436 34 2010/ 11 1,822,910 30,989 1,791,920 248,779 0 37,995 364,582 1,726,622 1,140,565 5,555,001 35 2011/ 12 1,954,763 33,231 1,921,532 280,059 0 36,955 390,953 2,117,575 1,213,565 6,768,567 36 2012/ 13 2,060,639 35,031 2,025,608 340,090 0 35,878 412,128 2,529,703 1,237,512 8,006,078 37 2013/ 14 2,159,197 36,706 2,122,491 390,81¢ 0 34,866 431,839 2,961,542 1,264,971 9,271,049 38 2014/ 15 2,250,449 38,258 2,212,192 438,197 0 33,905 450,090 3,411,632 1,289,999 10,561,049 39 2015/ 16 2,334,733 39,690 2,295,042 482,397 0 32,990 466,947 3,878,578 1,312,709 11,873,757 40 2016/ 17 2,412,372 41,010 2,371,362 523,566 0 32,113 482,474 4,361,053 1,333,208 13,206,966 41 2017/ 18 2,483,678 42,223 2,441,455 561,849 0 31,271 496,736 4,857,788 1,351,600 14,558,565 42 2018/ 19 2,548,950 43,332 2,505,618 597,384 0 30,461 509,790 5,367,578 1,367,982 15,926,547 43 2019/ 20 2,608,475 44,344 2,564,131 630,305 0 29,680 521,695 5,889,Z73 1,382,450 17,308,998 44 2020/ 21 2,532,780 43,057 2,489,722 660,739 0 28,9451 506,556 6,395,829 1,293,482 18,602,480 45 2021/ 22 2,461,716 41,849 2,419,867 646,946 0 28,229 492,343 6,888,172 1,252,349 19,854,828 46 2022/ 23 2,392,623 40,675 2,351,948 633,284 0 27,531 478,525 7,366,697 1,212,608 21,067,437 47 2023/ 24 2,325,448 39,533 2,285,915 619,764 0 26,852 465,090 7,831,787 1,174,210 22,241,647 48 2024/ 25 2,260,137 38,422 2,221,715 606,394 0 26,190 452,027 8,283,814 1,137,104 23,378,750 49 2025/ 26 2,196,642 37,343 2,159,299 593,183 0 25,544 439,328 8,723,142 1,101,243 24,479,993 50 2026/ 27 Z,134,912 36,293 2,098,618 580,137 0 24,916 426,982 9,150,125 1,066,583 25,546,576 51 2027/ 28 2,074,898 35,273 2,039,6251 567,263 0 24,303 414,980 9,565,104 1,033,079 26,579,655 52 2028/ 29 2.016,555 34,281 1,982,274 554,567 0 23,706 403,311 9,968,415 1,000,690 27,580,345 53 2029/ 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9,968.415 0 27.580345 TOTAL 49,842,077 847,315 48,994,762 10,664,365 100 781,536 9,968,415 - - 27,580,345 _ -- Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 17,058,159 289,989 16,768,171 2,406,585 100 388,805 3,411,632 - - 10,561,049 To: 2024/ 25 41,419,070 704,124 40,714,946 8,369,215 100 683.067 8,283,814 23,378,750 --- To: 2029/ 30 49.842.077 847.315 48.994.762 10.664.365 100 781.536. 9,968.415 _ _ 27.580.345- ' Based on revenues from Basic Tax Increment (1.0",6), exclusive of bond ovenides. ' PCDC's total ERAF shift for FY 2004/05 was $918,641. This analysis assumes the PCDC is required to make the same amount for the FY 2005/06 ERAF shift and the PCDC allocates most of the total ERAF shift for the Petaluma Community Development Project Area. Assumptions: Present value discounted to FY 2005/06 it; 5.50,6 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table D -3A Tax Revenues Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Original Area (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 First & Second Payments to Aver ev Sunolementd Pavments Total Basic T;x Revenues (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Secured, Increase First & Supplemental Supplemental First & Supplemental Unitary Incremental Year Fiscal State Board, in AV Second Secured Secured Second Secured Payments Tax (N) Year Unsecured AV Over Base Pavments Assessments Payments Pavments Pavments Revenues 1976/ 77 18,832,170 28 2004/ 05 0 29 2005/ 06 101,667,384 82,835,214 828,352 20,459,328 204,593 828,352 204,593 0 1,032,945 30 2006/ 07 123,964,024 105,131,854 1,051,319 21,070,811 210,708 1,051,319 210,708 0 1,262,027 31 2007/ 08 147,318,080 128,485,910 1,284,859 23,881,450 238,814 1,284,859 238,814 0 1,523,674 32 2008/ 09 173,949,856 155,117,686 1,551,177 24.594,455 245,945 1,551,177 245,945 0 1,797,121 33 2009/ 10 201,827,273 182,995,103 1,829,951 25,328,185 253,282 1,829,951 253,282 0 2,083,233 34 2010/ 11 230,995,968 212,163,798 2,121,638 26,083,230 260,832 2,121,638 260,832 0 2,382,470 35 2011/ 12 261,503,082 242,670,912 2,426,7091 26,860,197 268,602 2,426,709 268,602 0 2,695,311 36 2012/ 13 293,397,305 274,565,135 2,745,6511 25,191,693 251,917 2,745,651 251,917 0 2,997,568 37 2013/ 14 324,260,908 305,428,738 3,054,287 25,940,354 259,404 3,054,287 259,404 0 3,313,691 38 2014/ 15 356,490,444 337,658,274 3,376,583 26,710,703 267,107 3,376,583 267,107 0 3,643,690 39 2015/ 16 390,134,920 371,302,750 3,713,028 27,503,357 275,034 3,713,028 275,034 0 3,988,061 40 2016/ 17 425,244,939 406,412,769 4,064,128 28,318,949 283,189 4,064,128 283,189 0 4,347,317 41 2017/ 18 461,872,752 443,040,582 4,430,406 29,158,131 291,581 4,430,406 291,581 0 4,721,987 42 2018/ 19 500,072,302 481,240,132 4,812,401 30,021,573 300,216 4,812,401 300,216 0 5,112,617 43 2019/ 20 539,899,286 521,067,116 5,210,671 30,909,964 309,100 5,210,671 309,100 0 5,519,771 44 2020/ 21 581,411,200 562,579,030 5,625,790 2,858,047 28,580 5,625,790 28,580 0 5,654,371 45 2021/ 22 595,701,435 576,869,265 5,768,693 2,929,498 29,295 5,768,693 29,295 0 5,797,988 46 2022/ 23 610,348,927 591,516,757 5,915,168 3,002,736 30,027 5,915,168 30,027 0 5,945,195 47 2023/ 24 625,362,605 606,530,435 6,065,304 3,077,804 30,778 6,065,304 30,778 0 6,096,082 48 2024/ 25 640,751,626 621,919,456 6,219,195 3,154,749 31,547 6,219,195 31,547 0 6,250,742 49 2025/ 26 656,525,372 637,693,202 6,376,932 3,233,618 32,336 6,376,932 32,336 0 6,409,268 50 2026/ 27 672,693,462 653,861,292 6,538,613 3,314,458 33,145 6,538,613 33,145 0 6,571,757 51 2027/ 28 689,265,753 670,433,583 6,704,336 3,397,320 33,973 6,704,336 33,973 0 6,738,309 52 2028/ 29 706,252,353 6B7,420,183 6,874,202 3,482,253 34,823 6,874,202 34,823 0 6,909,024 53 2029/ 30 723.663,617 704.831.447 0 3,569.309 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL --- --- - 98,589,392 - 4,204,829 98,589,392 4,204,829 0 102,794,220 Cumulative - _ To: 2014/ 15 - - 20,270,526 2,461,204 20,270,526 2,461,204 0 22,731,730 To: 2024/ 25 - - - 72,095,309 _-_ 4,070,552 72,095,309 4,070,552 0 76,165,861 To: 2029/ 30 - - - 98.589.3921 4.204.829, 98.589.392 4.204.829 0 102.794.220 Notes: First & Second Payments arc based on the I`8, basic tax rate applied to the Increase in AV Over Base. Supplemental Secured Assessments include reassessed property and new development. Supplemental Secured Payments are based on the 196 basic tax rate applied to the Supplemental Secured Assessments. Unitary payments are estimated to escalate at an annual rate of. 096 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table D -3B Growth in Assessed Value Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Original Area (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Growth in Secured Assessed Value Total Secured, State Board and Unsecured AV (1) (2) (3) (4) Growtl Rates (7) (8) (9) (10) Secured Inflationary Reassessed New (5) (6) Secured State Unsecured Secured, Year Fiscal AV Adjustments Property Development Annual Average AV Board AV State Board, (N) Year Assessments Assessments Annual Unsecured AV 1976/ 77 28 2004/ 05 29 2005/ 06 91,865,600 1,837,312 459,328 20,000,000 91,865,600 0 9,801,784 101,667,384 30 2006/ 07 114,162,240 2,283,245 570,811 20,500,000 24.27% 24.2796 114,162,240 0 9,801,784 123,964,024 31 2007/ 08 137,516,296 2,750,326 687,581 23,193,868 20.4696 22.35% 137,516,296 0 9,801,784 147,318,080 32 2008/ 09 164,148,072 3,282,961 820,740 23,773,715 19.37% 21.35% 164,148,072 0 9,801,784 173,949,856 33 2009/ 10 192,025,489 3,840,510 960,127 24,368,058 16.9896 20.2490 192,025,489 0 9,801,784 201,827.273 34 2010/ It 221,194,184 4,423,884 1,105,971 24,977,259 15.19% 19.21% 221,194,184 0 9,801,784 230,995,968 35 2011/ 12 251,701,298 5,034,026 1,258,506 25,601,691 13.7990 18.29% 251,701,298 0 9,801,784 261,503,082 36 2012/ 13 283,595,521 5,671,910 1,417,978 23,773,715 12.6796 17.47% 283,595,521 0 9,801,784 293,397,305 37 2013/ 14 314,459,124 6,289,182 1,572,296 24,368,058 10.8896 16.63% 314,459,124 0 9,801,784 324,260,908 38 2014/ 15 346,688,660 6,933,773 1,733,443 24,977.259 10.25% 15.90% 346,688,660 0 9,801,784 356,490,444 39 2015/ 16 380,333,136 7,606,663 1,901,666 25,601,6911 9.70% 15.27% 380,333,136 0 9,801,784 390,134,920 40 2016/ 17 415,443,155 8,308,863 2,077,216 26,241,733 9.2396 14.70% 415,443,155 0 9,801,784 425,244,939 41 2017/ 18 452,070,968 9,041,419 2,260,355 26,897,776 8.8296 14.200. 452,070,968 0 9,801,784 461,872,752 42 2018/ 19 490,270,518 9,805,410 2,451,353 27,570,221 8.4596 13.75% 490,270,518 0 9,801,784 500,072,302 43 2019/ 20 530,097,502 10,601,950 2,650,488 28,259,476 8.1290 13.3490 530,097,502 0 9,801,784 539,899,286 44 2020/ 21 571,609,416 11,432,188 2,858,047 0 7.8390 12.96% 571,609,416 0 9,801,784 581,411,200 45 2021/ 22 585,899,651 11,717,993 2,929,498 0 2.5090 12.2890 585,899,651 0 9,801,784 595,701,435 46 2022/ 23 600,547,143 12,010,943 3,002,736 0 2.50% 11.68% 600,547,143 0 9,801,784 610,348,927 47 2023/ 24 615,560,821 12,311,216 3,077,804 0 2.5096 11.15% 615,560,821 0 9,801,784 625,362,605 48 2024/ 25 630,949,842 12,618,997 3,154,749 0 2.50% 10.67% 630,949,842 0 9,801,784 640,751,626 49 2025/ 26 646,723,588 12,934,472 3,233,618 0 2.50% 10.25% 646,723,588 0 9,801,784 656,525,372 50 2026/ 27 662,891,678 13,257,834 3,314,458 0 2.509' 9.87% 662,891,678 0 9,801,784 672,693,462 51 2027/ 28 679,463,969 13,589,279 3,397,320 0 2.5090 9.5290 679,463,969 0 9,801,784 689,265,753 52 2028/ 29 696,450,569 13,929,011 3,482 253 0 2.5096 9.2106 ' 696,450,569 0 9,801,784 706,252,353 53 2029/30 713.861,833 14,277.237 3,569.309 0 N/A N/A 713.861.833 0 9.801,784 723.663.617 TOTAL -, - - 370,104,522 - - _ -- - - - -- - CumulativeTo: 2014/ 15 -_ - - - - 235,533,624 - - - To: 2024/ 25 - - 370,104,522 - - _ -- - -- To: 2029/ 30 - - - - 370.104.522 - - --- - - - Assumptions: Annual Inflationary Adjustment: 290 of Secured AV State Board Annual Increase: 0% Reassessed Property Assessments: 0.5% of Secured AV Unsecured AV Annual Increase: 0% New Developpment Assumptions: $20 million in constant FY 2005/06 dollars per year from FY 2005/06 to FY 2019/20 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Year Fiscal (N) Year 1976/ 77 29 2005/06 30 2006/07 31 2007108 32 2008/09 33 2009/10 34 2010/11 35 2011/12 36 2012/13 37 2013/14 38 2014/15 39 20t5/16 40 2016/ 17 41 2017/ 18 42 2018/ 19 43 2019/20 44 2020/21 45 2021122 46 2022123 47 2023/24 48 2024/25 49 2025/26 50 2026/27 51 2027/28 52 2028/29 53 2029/30 TOTAL Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 To: 2024/25 To: 2029/30 Levv: 16.44% Levy: 27.859. Levv: 1.869. Levv: 0.75% Levv: 0.241?6 Levv: 1.58% Unadjusted Levies (7) Maria Sonoma Most. Abatement Levv: 0.24% (8) Bay Arca Air Quality hlgmt. Dist. Levv: 0.1996 10,928 Appendix Table D4A 1,240 Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities 161 Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Original Area 161 (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) City County County So. Co. Water Spring Lake Zone 2A General General Library Agency Park Petaluma Fund JAI General SCWA Basin Levv: 16.44% Levy: 27.859. Levv: 1.869. Levv: 0.75% Levv: 0.241?6 Levv: 1.58% Unadjusted Levies (7) Maria Sonoma Most. Abatement Levv: 0.24% (8) Bay Arca Air Quality hlgmt. Dist. Levv: 0.1996 10,928 18,517 1,240 499 161 1,049 161 124 18,Z57 30,936 2,071 834 269 1,752 269 207 25,934 43,945 2,942 1,185 382 2,489 382 294 34,688 58,779 3,936 1,585 511 3,329 511 393 43,852 74,307 4,975 2,003 646 4,209 647 496 53,441 90,554 6,063 2,441 788 5,129 788 605 63,469 107,547 7,201 2,899 935 6,091 936 719 73,953 140,235 9,390 3,781 1,220 7,943 1,220 937 84,099 171,867 11,508 4,633 1,495 9,734 1,496 1,148 94,693 204,899 13,719 5,524 1,782 11,605 1,783 1,369 105,753 239,381 16,028 6,453 2,082 13,558 2,083 1,599 117,294 275,365 18,438 7,423 2,395 15,596 2,396 1,840 129,334 312,905 20,951 8,435 2,721 17,723 2,723 2,091 141,891 352,056 23,572 9,491 3,062 19,940 3,063 2,352 154,983 392,874 26,306 10,591 3,417 22,252 3,419 2,625 168,629 435,420 29,154 11,738 3,787 24,662 3,789 2,909 173,327 450,066 30,135 12,133 3,914 25,491 3,916 3,007 178,141 465,078 31,140 12,538 4,045 26,341 4,047 3,107 183,077 480,466 32,170 1Z,953 4,179 27,213 4,181 3,210 188,135 496,238 33,226 13,378 4.316 28,106 4,318 3,316 193,321 512,404 34,309 13,814 4,456 29,022 4,459 3,424 198,635 528,975 35,418 14,260 4,601 29,960 4,603 3,534 204,083 545,960 36,556 14,718 4,748 30,922 4,751 3,648 209,667 563,369 37,721 15,188 4,900 31,908 4,902 3,764 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,849.585 6.992,144 468,170 188,497 60,812 396.025 60,843 46.717 503,314 941,586 63,045 25,384 8,189 53,330 8,193 6,291 2,043,879 4,841,435 324,166 130,517 42,107 274,212 42,128 32,348 2,849,585 6,992,144 468,170 188,497 60,812 396,025 60,843 46,717 [A] The City's pass,through is based only on the first tier of the ABIZ90 pass-through. Its shares of the second and third tiers are retained by the Agency. Petaluma Community Development Commission Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Preliminary Report April 2006 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table D -4B Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadjusted Levies Pemlumn Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Original Arra (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) (9) (10) (U) (12) (13) (14) (15) Pemlumn Petaluma Sonoma Co. School Petaluma Schools Total City City Joint Junior Service High-Elem Equalization Pass-Throughs Elem jt High College Administration AWUF Aid Year Fiscal (N) Year Lev,: 14.54% Levv: 17.70% Levv: 5.26"6 Levv: 1.93% Levv: 11.11% Levv: O31% Levv: 100.00"6 19761 77 29 2005106 9,667 11,766 3,500 1,283 7,384 209 66,486 30 2006/07 16,151 19,658 5,847 2,143 12,337 349 111,080 31 2007108 22,942 27,924 8,305 3,044 17,524 495 157,788 32 2008109 30,686 37,350 11,109 4,072 23,440 662 211,051 33 2009/10 38,793 47,217 14,044 5,148 29,632 837 266,806 34 2010111 47,275 57,542 17,114 6,273 36,111 1,021 325,144 35 2011/ 12 56,146 68,339 20,326 7,450 42,887 1,212 386,158 36 2012/ 13 73,211 89,111 26,504 9,715 55,923 1,580 494,722 37 2013114 89,725 109,211 32,482 11,906 68,537 1,937 599,778 38 2014/ 15 106,969 130,201 38,725 14,194 81,710 2,309 709,483 39 2015116 124,971 152,112 45,242 16,583 95,460 2,698 824,005 40 2016/17 143,757 174,978 52,043 19,076 109,810 3,103 943,515 41 2017/18 163,355 198,832 59,138 21,676 124,780 3,526 1,068,191 42 20181 19 183,794 223,710 66,537 24,388 140,393 3,968 1,198,218 43 2019/20 205,104 249,648 74,252 27,216 156,670 4,428 1,333,784 44 2020/ 21 227,315 276,683 82,292 30,163 173,636 4,907 1,475,085 45 2021/22 234,961 285,990 85,060 31,178 179,477 5,072 1,523,727 46 2022/23 242,798 295,529 87,898 32,218 185,464 5,241 1,573,586 47 2023124 250,831 305,307 90,806 33,284 191,600 5,415 1,624,690 48 20241 25 259,065 315,329 93,787 34,377 197,889 5,592 1,677,073 49 2025/26 267,505 325,602 96,842 35,496 204,336 5,775 1,730,764 50 2026/27 276,156 336,131 99,974 36,644 210,944 5,961 1,785,799 51 2027/28 285,023 346,924 103,184 37,821 217,717 6,153 1,842,209 52 2028/29 294,112 357,987 106,474 39,027 224,660 6,349 1,900,029 53 2029/30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3.650.312 4,443,083 1,321.484 484,376 2,788.322 78.800 23,829,170 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 491,563 598,321 177,956 65,228 375,485 10,611 3,328,496 To: 2024/25 2,527,515 3,076,438 915,010 335,387 1,930,664 54,562 16,570,369 To: 2029/30 3,650,312 4,443,083 1,321,484 484,376 2,788,322 78,800 23,829,170 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table D -4C Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadjusted Levies Pemluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Original Area (In Present Value or Constant 2005/06 Dollars) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) City County County So. Co. Water Spring Lake Zone 2A Marin Bay Area General General Library Agency Park Petaluma Sonoma Air Quality FundIAt General SCWA Basin Mosy. Mgmt. Dist. Year Fiscal Abatement (N) Year Levv: 16.449. Levv: 27.859. Levv: 1.86% Levv: 0.759 Levv: 0.249a Levv: 1.589. Levv: 0.24% Levv: 0.19"16 1976/ 77 29 2005106 10,928 18,517 1,240 499 161 1,049 161 124 30 2006/07 17,305 29,323 1,963 791 255 1,661 255 196 31 2007/08 23,300 39,482 2,644 1,064 343 2,236 344 264 32 2008/09 29,541 50,057 3,352 1,349 435 2,835 436 334 33 2009/10 35,398 59,982 4,016 1,617 522 3,397 522 401 34 2010/ ll 40,889 69,286 4,639 1,868 603 3,924 603 463 35 2011/12 46,031 77,998 5,Z22 2,103 678 4,418 679 521 36 2012/ 13 50,838 96,403 6,455 2,599 838 5,460 839 644 37 7013/14 54,799 111,988 7,498 3,019 974 6,343 974 748 38 2014/ 15 58,485 126,552 8,473 3,412 1,101 7,168 1,101 846 39 2015/ 16 61,911 140,141 9,383 3,778 1,219 7,937 1,219 936 40 2016/ 17 65,088 152,803 10,231 4,119 1,329 8,655 1,330 1,021 41 2017/ 18 68,028 164,582 11,020 4,437 1,431 9,322 1,432 1,100 42 2018/ 19 70,741 175,521 11,752 4,732 1,527 9,941 1,527 1,173 43 2019/ 20 73,240 185,660 12,431 5,005 1,615 10,516 1,616 1,240 44 2020/21 75,535 195,039 13,059 5,258 1,696 11,047 1,697 1,303 45 2021122 73,591 191,089 12,795 5,151 1,662 10,823 1,663 1,277 46 2022123 71,692 187,169 12,532 5,046 1,628 10,601 1,629 1,251 47 2023/24 69,838 183,281 12,272 4,941 1,594 10,381 1,595 1,225 48 2024/25 68,026 179,429 12,014 4,837 1,561 10,163 1,561 1,199 49 2025/26 66,257 175,616 11,759 4,734 1,527 9,947 1,528 1,173 50 2026127 64,529 171,844 11,506 4,633 1,495 9,733 1,495 1,148 51 2027/28 62,842 168,115 11,256 4,532 1,462 9,522 1,463 1,123 52 2028/29 61,196 164,432 11,010 4,433 1,430 9,313 1,431 1,099 53 2029/30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1.320,028 3.114.311 208.524 83.957 27.086 176.390 27.099 20.808 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 367,515 679,588 45,503 18,321 5,911 38,491 5,913 4,541 To: 2024/ 25 1,065,204 2,434,304 162,993 65,625 21,172 137,676 21,182 16,265 To: 2029130 1,320,028 3,114,311 208,524 83,957 27,086 176,390 27,099 20,808 [A] The City's pass-through is based only an the first tier of the AB1290 pass-through. Its shares of the second and third tiers are retained by the Agency. Present value discounted to FY 2005/06 at: 5.59. Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table D -4D Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadjusted Levies Petaluma Plan Amendments 6t Fiscal Merger - CDD Original Area (In Present Value, 2005/06 Dollars) (9) (10) (I1) (12) (13) (14) (15) Petaluma Petaluma Sonoma Co. School Petaluma Schools Total City City ]ointlunior Service High-Elem Equalization Pass-Throughs Elem Jt High College Administration AWUF Aid Year Fiscal (N) Year Levv: 14.54% Levv: 17.709n Lew: 5.269u Levv: 1.9394 Levv: 11.11% Levv: 0.31% Lev,: 100.00% 1976/ 77 29 2005/06 9,667 11,766 3,500 1,283 7,384 209 66,486 30 2006/07 15,309 18,633 5,542 2,031 11,694 330 105,289 31 2007/08 20,612 25,089 7,462 2,735 15,745 445 141,765 32 2008/09 26,133 31,808 9,461 3,468 19,962 564 179,734 33 2009/10 31,314 38,115 11,336 4,155 23,919 676 215,370 34 2010/11 36,171 44,027 13,095 4,800 27,630 781 248,779 35 2011/ 12 40,720 49,563 14,741 5,403 31,104 879 280,059 36 2012/ 13 50,328 61,258 18,220 6,678 38,443 1,086 340,090 37 2013/ 14 58,465 71,162 21,165 7,758 44,659 1,262 390,814 38 2014/ 15 66,067 80,416 23,918 8,767 50,466 1,426 438,197 39 2015/ 16 73,162 89,051 26,486 9,708 55,885 1,579 482,397 40 2016/ 17 79,772 97,097 28,879 10,585 60,935 1,722 523,566 41 2017/ 18 85,922 104,58Z 31,105 11,401 65,632 1,855 561,849 42 2018/ 19 91,632 111,533 33,173 12,159 69,994 1,978 597,384 43 2019/ 20 96,926 117,976 35,089 12,861 74,038 2,092 630,305 44 2020/ 21 101,822 123,935 36,861 13,511 77,777 2,198 660,739 45 2021/ 22 99,760 121,426 36,115 13,238 76,203 2,154 646,946 46 Z022/23 97,713 118,935 35,374 12,966 74,639 2,109 633,284 47 2023/ 24 95,684 116,464 34,639 12,697 73,089 2,066 619,764 48 2024/ 25 93,673 114,016 33,911 12,430 71,553 2,022 606,394 49 2025/26 91,682 111,593 33,191 12,166 70,032 1,979 593,183 50 2026/ 27 89,713 109,196 32,478 11,904 68,528 1,937 580,137 51 2027/ 28 87,766 106,827 31,773 11,646 67,041 1,895 567,263 52 2028/ 29 85,843 104,487 31,077 11,391 65,572 1,853 554,567 53 2029130 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1.625.854 1.978,955 588,591 215.742 1,241,923 35.098 10.664.365 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 354,785 431,837 128,439 47,078 271,006 7,659 2,406,585 To: 2024/ 25 1,270,851 1,546,853 460,073 168,635 970,750 27,434 8,369,215 To: 2029/30 1,625,854 1,978,955 588,591 215,742 1,241,923 35,098 10,664,365 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table E -I Summary of Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Plan Amendments 6t Fiscal Merger - CBD Added Area Summary of Assumptions Growth Assumptions FY 2005/06 Secured Assessed Value: $67,856,371 FY 2005/06 State Board Assessed Value $0 FY 2005/06 Unsecured Assessed Value: $7,669 515 FY 2005/06 Total Assessed Value. $75,525,886 FY 2005/06 Unitary Payments (Fsc): $0 Annual Inflationary Adjustment: 296 of Secured AV $37,020,779 Reassessed Property Assessments: 0.596 of Secured AV 2,177,767 New Developpment Assumptions: $10 million in constant FY 2005/06 dollars per year from FY 2005/06 to FY 2019/20 Annual Growth in State Board Assessed Value: 0.096 Annual Growth in Unsecured Assessed Value: 0.096 Annual Growth in Unitary Payments: 0.096 Tax Increment Generation 36,391,426 Property Tax Race: 1.096 County Property Tax Admin Fee: Less: State ERAF Payments Pass -Through Payments and Housing Set -Aside are calculated based an Incremental Tax Revenues. 0 Sponsoring Community 87,206,971 City receives pass-through Projected Use of TI Funds City's Unadjusted Levy Within Project Area: 16.4396 Agency Administration Cost 1,629,135 Cost in FY 2005/06 $16,229 Annual Increase: 3.096 Present Value Discount Rate 59.957.051 Present value discounted to FY 2005/06 at: 5.5961 Tax Increment Projections From FY 2005/06 Through End of Prciect Petaluma Community Develapment Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Constant Nominal Dollars* FY 2005/06 Dollars* County Distribution of Basic Incremental Taxes Incremental Tax Revenues $128,103,926 $37,020,779 Less: County Property Tax Admin Fee 2,177,767 629,353 Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 125,926,159 36,391,426 TI Available to Agency After Obligations Tax Revenues Remitted to Agency 125,926,159 36,391,426 Less: Pass-Throughs to Taxing Entities 38,719,189 10,409,028 Less: State ERAF Payments 0 0 TI Available to Agency After Obligations 87,206,971 25,982,399 Projected Use of TI Funds Agency Administration (Non-Hsg) 1,629,135 520,944 TI Available for Housing Programs 25,620,785 7,404,156 TI Available for Non -Housing Projects 59.957.051 18,057,299 Total Tl Funds Used by Agency 87,206,971 25,982,399 Subtoml, TI for Housine 87 Projects 85,577,836 25,461,455 Cumulative TI for Housing Programs 2014/ 15 1,964,804 1,462,241 2024/25 7,063,866 3,782,127 2034135 14,147,049 5,689,302 2046/47 25,620,785 7,404,156 Cumulative TI for Non -Housing Projects 2014/ 15 5,383,693 4,012,744 2024/25 17,959,463 9,755,472 2034/35 34,668,578 14,262,370 2046/47 59,957,051 18,057,299 Petaluma Community Develapment Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table E -2A Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Added Area (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 County Distribution of Base Incremental Taws I, Aeeacv Oblieat'ons Net Tax Increment Net Tax Increment (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Availa'de for Available for Incremental County Net Taxes Pass- Slate Agency Housine 'reenters Non-Housi m Projects Year Fiscal Tax Admin Remitted Through ERAF Admin (6) (7) (8) (9) (N) Year Revenues' Fee to Aeencv Pavments Paymene '', Expenses Annual Cumulative Annual Cumulative 0 2000/ 01 5 2005/ 06 371,633 6,318 365,315 74,327 16,229 74,327 74,327 200,433 200,433 6 2006/ 07 491,682 8,359 483,323 98,336 17,713 98,336 172,663 268,938 469,371 7 2007/ 08 617,245 10,493 606,751 123,449 20,803 123,449 296,112 339,050 808,421 8 2008/ 09 748,522 12,725 735,797 149,704 19,708 149,704 445,816 416,680 1,225,102 9 2009/ 10 885,720 15,057 870,663 177,144 20,595 177,144 622,960 495,780 1,720,882 10 20101 11 1,029,055 17,494 1,011,561 205,811 21,448 205,811 828,771 578,490 2,299,372 11 2011/ 12 1,178,745 20,039 1,158,707 235,749 22,2841 235,749 1,064,520 664,924 2,964,296 12 2012/ 13 1,335,021 22,695 1,312,326 288,430 23,245 267,004 1,331,525 733,647 3,697,943 13 2013/ 14 1,498,118 25,468 1,472,650 343,418 24,191 299,624 1,631,148 805,417 4,503,360 14 2014/ 15 1,668,278 28,361 1,639,9181 400,795 25,134 333,656 1,964,804 880,332 5,383,693 15 2015/ 16 1,845,754 31,378 1,814,376 460,647 26,080 369,151 2,333,955 958,498 6,342,191 16 2016/ 17 2,030,805 34,524 1,996,2811 523,061 27,034 406,161 2,740,116 1,040,026 7,382,217 17 2017/ 18 2,223,698 37,803 2,185,895 588,1N 27,998 444,740 3,184,855 1,125,030 8,507,247 18 2018/ 19 2,424,709 41,220 2,383,489 655,940 28,976 484,942 3,669,797 1,213,631 9,720,877 19 2019/ 20 2,634,126 44,780 2,589,346 726597 29,972 526,825 4,196,622 1,305,952 11,026,829 20 20ZO/ 21 2,707,411 46,026 2,661,385 771,230 30,941 541,482 4,738,104 1,317,732 12,344,561 21 2021/ 22 2,785,354 47,351 2,738,003 797,707 31,940 557,071 5,295,175 1,351,285 13,695,847 22 2022/ 23 2,865,246 48,709 2,816,537 824,846 32,970 573,049 5,868,224 1,385,672 15,081,519 23 2023/ 24 2,947,135 50,101 2,897,034 852,663 34,030 589,427 6,457,652 1,420,914 16,502,433 24 2024/ 25 3,031,072 51,528 2,979,544 881,176 35,123 606,214 7,063,866 1,457,031 17,959,463 25 2025/ 26 3,117,107 52,991 3,064,116 910,402 36,248 623,421 7,687,287 1,494,045 19,453,508 26 2026/ 27 3,205,293 54,490 3,150,803 940,358 37,408 641,059 8,328,346 1,531,979 20,985,486 27 20271 28 3,295,683 56,027 3,239,656 971,063 38,602 659,137 8,987,482 1,570,855 22,556,341 28 20281 29 3,388,333 57,602 3,330,731 1,002,536 39,832 677,667 9,665,149 1,610,697 24,167,038 29 2029130 3,483,300 59,216 3,424,083 1,034,796 41,027 696,660 10,361,809 1,651,601 25,818,638 30 2030/ 31 3,580,640 fi0,871 3,519,769 1,067,862 42,258 716,128 11,077,937 1,693,521 27,512,160 31 2031/ 32 3,680,414 62,567 3,617,847 1,101,754 43,526 736,083 11,814,020 1,736,484 29,248,644 32 2032/ 33 3,782,683 64,306 3,718,377 1,146,019 44,832 75fi,537 12,570,556 1,770,990 31,019,634 33 2033/ 34 3,887,508 66,088 3,821,420 1,191,390 46,177 777,502 ]3,348,058 1,806,352 32,825,986 34 2034/ 35 3,994,954 67,914 3,927,039 1,237,895 47,562 798,991 14,147,049 1,842,592 34,668,578 35 2035/ 36 4,105,086 69,786 4,035,299 1,285,563 48,989 821,017 14,968,066 1,879,730 36,548,308 36 2036/ 37 4,217,971 71,706 4,146,265 1,334,423 50,458 843,594 15,811,660 1,917,790 38,466,098 37 2037/ 38 4,333,678 73,673 4,260,006 1,384,504 51,972 866,736 16,678,396 1,956,794 40,422,892 38 2038/ 39 4,452,278 75,689 4,376,589 1,435,837 53,531 890,456 17,568,851 1,996,766 42,419,658 39 20391 40 4,573,843 77,755 4,496,088 1,488,453 55,137 914,769 18,483,620 2,037,729 44,457,387 40 2040/ 41 4,698,447 79,874 4,618,574 1,542,385 56,791 939,689 19,423,309 2,079,708 46,537,094 41 2041/ 42 4,826,167 82,045 4,744,122 1,597,665 58,495 965,233 20,388,543 2,122,728 48,659,823 42 2042/ 43 4,957,079 84,270 4,872,809 1,654,327 60,250 991,416 21,379,958 2,166,815 50,826,638 43 2043/ 44 5,091,264 86,551 5,004,7121 1,712,406 62,057 1,018,253 22,398,211 2,211,996 53,038,634 44 2044/ 45 5,228,804 88,890 5,139,914 1,771,937 63,919 1,045,761 23,443,972 2,258,297 55,296,931 45 2045/ 46 5,369,782 91,286 5,278,496 1,832,956 65,837 1,073,956 24,517,928 2,305,747 57,602,678 46 2046/ 47 5,514.284_ 93,743 5.420.542 1,895.500. 67.812 1,102.857 25,620,785 2.354.373 59.957,051 TOTAL 128,103,926 2,177,767 125,926,159 38,719,189 0 1,629.135 25,620,785 - 59,957,051 Cumulative _ - To: 2014/ 15 9,824,019 167,008 9,657,011 2,097,164 0 211,350 1,964,804 5,383,693 To: 2024/ 25 35,319,330 600,429 34,718,901 9,179,158 0 516,414 7,063,866 17,959,463 To: 2034/ 35 70,735,243 1,202,499 69,532,744 19,783,23Z 0 933,886 14,147,049 34,668,578 - To: 2046/ 47 128.103.926 2.177.767 125.926.1591 38.719.189 0 1.629.135 25.620.785 59,957.051 ' Based on revenues from Basic Tax Increment (1.096), exclusive of bond overrides. r PCDC's total ERAF shift for FY 2004/05 was $918,641. This anulysis assumes the PCDC is required to make the same amount for the FY 2005/06 ERAF shift and the PCDC allocates most of the total ERAF shift for the Petaluma Community Development Project Arco. Assumptions: County Admin Fee as a %of Incremental Tax Revenues: 1.7% Pass -Through Payments and Housing Set -Aside are calculated based on Incremental Tax Revenues. Agency Administration Annual Increase: 30,6 TI for Housing Programs as a 91, of Incremental Tax Revenues: 20°a Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table E -2B Tax Increment Projections Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Added Area (In Present Value or Consmnt 2005/06 Dollars) Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 County Distribution of Basic ncremenml Taxes Aeene r Obliemmrs Net Tax Increment Net Tax Increment (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) I Available for Available for Ineremenml County Net Taxes Pass- State Agency Housine P--mnams Non-Housine Proieets Year Fiscal Tax Admin Remitted Through ERAF Admin (6) (7) (8) (9) (N) Year Revenues' Fee to Aeencv, Payments Payment Expenses Annual Cumulative Annual Cumulative 0 2000/ 01 5 2005/ 06 371,633 6,318 365,315 74,327 0 16,229 74,327 74,327 200,433 200,433 6 2006/ 07 466,049 7,923 458,126 93,210 0 16,789 93,210 167,536 254,917 455,351 7 2007/ 08 554,565 9,428 545,137 110,913 0 18,691 110,913 278,449 304,620 759,971 8 2008/ 09 637,451 10,837 626,615 127,490 0 16,783 127,490 405,9401 354,851 1,114,822 9 2009/ 10 714,968 12,154 702,814 142,994 0 16,625 142,994 548,933 400,202 1,515,024 10 2010/ 11 787,365 13,385 773,980 157,473 0 16,411 157,473 706,406 442,623 1,957,647 11 2011/ 12 854,880 14,533 840,347 170,976 0 16,161 170,976 877,382 482,234 2,439,880 12 2012/ 13 917,743 15,602 902,141 198,278 0 15,979 183,549 1,060,931 504,336 2,944,216 13 2013/ 14 976,172 16,595 959,577 223,771 0 15,763 195,234 1,256,165 524,809 3,469,025 14 2014/ 15 1,030,378 17,516 1,012,861 247,543 0 15,524 206,076 1,462,241 543,719 4,012,744 15 2015/ 16 1,080,561 18,370 1,062,191 Z69,677 0 15,268 216,112 1,678,353 561,134 4,573,878 16 2016/ 17 1,126,915 19,158 1,107,757 290,252 0 15,001 225,383 1,903,736 577,121 5,150,999 17 2017/ 18 1,169,624 19,884 1,149,740 309,344 0 14,726 233,925 2,137,661 591,745 5,742,744 18 2018/ 19 1,208,865 20,551 1,188,314 327,026 0 14,447 241,773 2,379,434 605,069 6,347,813 19 2019/ 20 1,244,807 21,162 1,223,645 343,367 0 14,164 248,961 2,628,395 617,153 6,964,966 20 2020/ 21 1,212,739 20,617 1,192,122 345,459 0 13,859 242,548 2,870,943 590,256 7,555,222 21 2021/ 22 1,182,609 20,104 1,162,504 338,691 0 13,561 236,522 3,107,465 573,730 8,128,952 22 2022/ 23 1,153,108 19,603 1,133,506 331,956 0 13,269 230,622 3,338,086 557,659 8,686,611 23 2023/ 24 1,124,232 19,112 1,105,120 325,262 0 12,981 224,846 3,562,933 542,030 9,228,641 24 2024/ 25 1,095,972 18,632 1,077,341 318,615 0 12,700 219,194 3,782,127 526,832 9,755,472 25 2025/ 26 1,068,323 18,161 1,050,161 312,021 0 12,423 213,665 3,995,792 512,052 10,267,525 26 2026/ 27 1,041,276 17,702 1,023,575 305,486 0 12,152 208,255 4,204,047 49701 10,765,206 27 2027/ 28 1,014,825 17,252 997,573 299,015 0 11,887 20Z,965 4,407,012 483,706 11,248,912 28 2028/ 29 988,962 16,812 972,149 292,613 0 11,6261 197,792 4,604,8041 470,118 11,719,031 29 2029/ 30 963,678 16,383 947,295 286,283 0 11,350 192,736 4,797,5401 456,926 12,175,957 30 2030/ 31 938,965 15,962 923,002 280,029 0 11,081 187,793 4,985,333 444,098 12,620,055 31 2031/ 32 914,814 15,552 899,262 273,855 0 10,819 182,963 5,168,296 431,625 13,051,680 32 2032/ 33 891,217 15,151 876,066 270,007 0 10,563 178,243 5,346,539 417,253 13,468,934 33 2033/ 34 868,165 14,759 853,406 266,063 0 10,312 173,633 5,520,172 403,398 13,872,332 34 2034/ 35 845,650 14,376 831,273 262,037 0 10,068 169,130 5,689,30Z 390,039 14,262,370 35 2035/ 36 823,661 14,002 809,659 257,941 0 9,829 164,732 5,854,034 377,157 14,639,527 36 2036/ 37 802,190 13,637 788,553 253,786 0 9,596 160,438 6,014,472 364,733 15,004,260 37 2037/ 38 781,228 13,281 767,947 249,583 0 9,369 156,246 6,170,718 352,750 15,357,009 38 2038/ 39 760,766 12,933 747,833 245,343 0 9,147 152,153 6,322,871 341,190 15,698,199 39 2039/ 40 740,794 12,594 728,201 241,075 0 8,930 148,159 6,471,030 330,037 16,028,236 40 2040/ 41 721,304 12,262 709,042 236,786 0 8,719144,261 6,615,291 319,276 16,347,512 41 2041/ 42 702,286 11,939 690,347 232,486 0 8,512 140,457 6,755,748 308,891 16,656,403 42 2042/ 43 683,730 11,623 672,107 226,162 0 8,310 136,74fi 6,892,494 298,869 16,955,272 43 2043/ 44 665,629 11,316 654,313 223,879 0 8,113 133,12fi 7,025,620 2B9,195 17,244,468 44 2044/ 45 647,972 11,016 636,957 219,585 0 7,921 129,594 7,155,214 279,856 17,524,324 45 2045/ 46 630,751 10,723 620,029 215,305 0 7,733 126,150 7,281,364 270,840 17,795,164 46 2046/ 47 613,_958 10.437 603.520 211,_044 0 7.550 122.792. 7.404,156 262.135 18,057.299 TOTAL 37,020,779 629,353 36,391,426 10,409,028 0 520,944 7,404,156 18,057,299 Cumulative - To: 2014/ 15 7,311,204 124,290 7,186,914 1,546,974 0 164,955 1,462,241 4,012,744 To: 2024/ 25 18,910,636 321,481 18,589,155 4,746,624 0 304,931 3,782,127 9,755,472 To: 2034/ 35 28,446,510 483,591 27,962,919 7,594,034 0 417,213 5,689,30Z 14,262,370 - To: 2046/ 47 37.020.779 629.353 36.391.426 10.409.028 0 520.944 7.404.156 18.057.299 ' Based an revenues from Basic Tax Increment (1.096), exclusive of bond overrides. ' PCDC's tocol ERAF shift for FY 2004/05 was $918,641. This analysis assumes the PCDC is required to make the same amount for die FY 2005/06 ERAF shift and the PCDC allocates most of the total ERAF shift for the Petaluma Community Development Project Area. Assumptions: Present value discounted to FY 2005/06 at: 5.596 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table E -3A Tax Revenues Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Added Area (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) First & Second Payments to Aeencv I (1) (2) (3) Secured, Increase First & Year Fiscal State Board, in AV Second (N) Year Unsecured AV Over Base Pnvments 0 2000/01 48,701,865 5 2005/ 06 75,525,886 26,824,021 268,240 6 2006/ 07 87,222,295 38,520,430 385,204 7 2007/08 99,461,115 50,759,250 507,592 8 2008/ 09 112,262,155 63,560,290 635,603 9 2009/ 10 125,645,877 76,944,012 769,440 10 2010/ 11 139,633,415 90,931,550 909,315 11 2011/ 12 154,246,595 105,544,730 1,055,447 12 2012/ 13 169,507,956 120,806,091 1,208,061 13 2013/ 14 185,440,774 136,738,909 1,367,389 14 2014/ 15 202,069,085 153,367,220 1,533,672 15 2015/ 16 219,417,704 170,715,839 1,707,158 16 2016/ 17 237,512,254 188,810,389 1,888,104 17 2017/ IS 256,379,189 207,677,324 2,076,773 18 2018/ 19 276,045,819 227,343,954 2,273,440 19 2019/ 20 296,540,337 247,838,472 2,478,385 20 2020/ 21 317,891,846 269,189,981 2,691,900 21 2021/ 22 325,647,404 276,945,539 2,769,455 22 2022/ 23 333,596,851 284,894,986 2,848,950 23 2023/ 24 341,745,035 293,043,170 2,930,432 24 2024/ 25 350,096,923 301,395,058 3,013,951 25 2025/ 26 358,657,608 309,955,743 3,099,557 26 2026/ 27 367,432,310 318,730,445 3,187,304 27 2027/ 28 376,426,380 327,724,515 3,277,245 28 2028/ 29 385,645,302 336,943,437 3,369,4341 29 2029/30 395,094,696 346,392,831 3,463,9281 30 2030/31 404,780,326 356,078,461 3,560,785: 31 2031/32 414,708,096 366,006,231 3,660,062 32 2032/ 33 424,884,061 376,182,196 3,761,822 33 2033/ 34 435,314,424 386,612,559 3,866,126 34 2034/ 35 446,005,547 397,303,682 3,973,037 35 2035/ 36 456,963,948 408,262,083 4,082,621 36 2036/ 37 468,196,309 419,494,444 4,194,944 37 2037/ 38 479,709,479 431,007,614 4,310,076 38 2038/ 39 491,510,478 442,808,613 4,428,086 39 2039/ 40 503,606,502 454,904,637 4,549,046 40 2040/ 41 516,004,926 467,303,061 4,673,031 41 2041/ 4Z 528,713,312 480,011,447 4,800,114 42 2042143 541,739,407 493,037,542 4,930,375 43 2043144 555,091,154 506,389,289 5,063,8931. 44 2044145 568,776,695 520,074,830 5,200,748 45 2045/ 46 582,804,374 534,102,509 5,341,025 46 2046/47 597.182.746, 548,480,881 5.484,809 TOTAL - 125,596,5831 Cumulative To: 2014/ 158,639,965 To: 2024/ 25 33,318,512 To: 2034/35 >_ - - 68,537,813 To: 2046/ 47 125,596.583 Supplemental Pavments Total Basic Tax Revenues (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Supplemental Supplemental First & Supplemental Unitary Incremental Secured Secured Second Secured Payments Tax Assessments Payments Pavmcnts Payments Revenues 10,339,282 103,393 268,240 103,393 0 371,633 10,647,764 106,478 385,204 106,478 0 491,682 10,965,208 109,652 507,592 109,652 0 617,245 11,291,869 112,919 635,603 112,919 0 748,522 11,628,011 116,280 769,440 116,280 0 885,720 11,973,902 119,739 909,315 119,739 0 1,029,055 12,329,8Z0 123,298 1,055,447 123,298 0 1,178,745 12,696,050 126,960 1,208,061 126,960 0 1,335,021 13,072,885 130,729 1,367,389 130,729 0 1,498,118 13,460,628 134,606 1,533,672 134,606 0 1,668,278 13,859,586 138,596 1,707,158 138,596 0 1,845,754 14,270,080 142,701 1,888,104 142,701 0 2,030,805 14,692,437 146,924 2,076,773 146,924 0 2,223,698 15,126,992 151,270 2,273,440 151,270 0 2,424,709 15,574,092 155,741 2,478,385 155,741 0 2,634,126 1,551,112 15,511 2,691,900 15,511 0 2,707,411 1,589,889 15,899 2,769,455 15,899 0 2,785,354 1,629,637 16,296 2,848,950 16,296 0 2,865,246 1,670,378 16,704 2,934,432 16,704 0 2,947,135 1,712,137 17,121 3,013,951 17,121 0 3,031,072 1,754,940 17,549 3,099,557 17,549 0 3,117,107 1,798,814 17,988 3,187,304 17,988 0 3,205,293 1,843,784 18,438 3,277,245 18,438 0 3,295,683 1,889,879 18,899 3,369,434 18,899 0 3,388,333 1,937,126 19,371 3,463,928 19,371 0 3,483,300 1,955,554 19,856 3,560,785 19,856 0 3,580,640 2,035,193 20,352 3,660,062 20,352 0 3,680,414 2,086,073 20,861 3,761,822 20,861 0 3,782,683 2,138,225 21,382 3,866,126 21,382 0 3,887,508 2,191,680 21,917 3,973,037 21,917 0 3,994,954 2,246,472 22,465 4,082,621 22,465 0 4,105,086 2,302,634 23,026 4,194,944 23,026 0 4,217,971 2,360,200 23,602 4,310,076 23,602 0 4,333,678 2,419,205 24,192 4,428,086 24,192 0 4,452,278 2,479,685 24,797 4,549,046 24,797 0 4,573,843 2,541,677 25,417 4,673,031 25,417 0 4,698,447 2,605,219 26,052 4,800,114 26,052 0 4,826,167 2,670,349 26,703 4,930,375 26,703 0 4,957,079 2,737,108 27,371 5,063,893 27,371 0 5,091,264 2,805,536 28,0551 5,200,748 28,055 0 5,228,804 2,875,674 28,757 5,341,025 28,757 0 5,369,782 2.947,566 29,476 5,484.809 29,476 0 5,514.284 2,507,344 125,596,583 2,507,344 0 128,103,926 1,184,054 8,639,965 1,184,054 0 9,824,019 - 2,000,818 33,318,512 2,000,818 0 35,319,330 2,197,430 68,537,813 2,197,430 0 70,735,243 2,507,344 125.596.583 2507.344 0 128.103,926 Notes: First & Second Payments are based on the 196 basic tax rate applied to the Increase in AV Over Base. Supplemental Secured Assessments include reassessed property and new development. Supplemental Secured Payments are based on the I",6 basic tax rate applied to the Supplemental Secured Assessments. Unitary payments are estimated to escalate at an annual rate of: 0% Petaluma Community Development Commission Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger Preliminary Report April 2006 year Fiscal (N) Year 0 2000/ 01 5 2005/ 06 6 2006/ 07 7 2007/ OB 8 2008/ 09 9 2009/ 10 10 2010/ 11 11 2011/ 12 1Z 2012/ 13 13 2013/ 14 14 2014/ 15 15 2015/ 16 16 2016/ 17 17 2017/ 18 18 2018/ 19 19 2019/ 20 20 2020/ 21 21 2021/ 22 22 2022/ 23 23 2023/ 24 24 2024/ 25 25 2025/ 26 26 2026/ 27 27 2027/ 28 28 2028/ 29 29 2029/ 30 30 2030/ 31 31 2031/ 32 32 2032/ 33 33 2033/ 34 34 2034/ 35 35 2035/ 36 36 2036/ 37 37 2037/ 38 38 2038/ 39 39 2039/40 40 2040/41 41 2041142 42 2042143 43 2043144 44 2044/ 45 45 2045/ 46 46 2046/ 47 TOTAL Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 To: 2024/ 25 To: 2034/35 To: 70461 47 Appendix Table &3B Growth in Assessed Value Petaluma Plan Amendments Sr Fiscal Merger - CBD Added Area (In Future Value or Nominal Dollars) 42,029,264 Growth in Secured F ssessed Value 6 (1) (2) (3) (4) Growth Rates Secured Inflationary Reassessed New (5) (6) AV Adjustments Property Development Annual Average 1,835,832 Assessments Assessments Annual 42,029,264 840,585 210,146 6 Secured 67,856,371 1,357,127 339,282 10,000,000 Board 79,552,780 1,591,056 397,764 10,250,000 17.249. 91,791,600 1,835,832 458,958 10,506,250 15.3890 104,592,640 2,091,653 5Z2,963 10,768,906 13.95% 117,976,362 2,359,527 589,882 11,038,129 12.8090 131,963,900 2,639,278 659,819 11,314,082 11.86% 146,577,080 2,931,542 732,885 11,596,934 11.07% 161,838,441 3,236,769 809,192 11,886,858 10.41% 177,771,259 3,555,425 888,856 12,184,029 9.84% 194,399,570 3,887,991 971,998 12,488,630 9.35% 211,748,189 4,234,964 1,058,741 12,800,845 8.9295 229,842,739 4,596,855 1,149,214 13,120,867 8.5590 248,709,674 4,974,193 1,243,548 13,448,888 8.2196 268,376,304 5,367,526 1,341,882 13,785,110 7.9190 288,870,822 5,777,416 1,444,354 14,129,738 7.6490 310,222,331 6,204,447 1,551,112 0 7.39% 317,977,889 6,359,558 1,589,889 0 2.50% 325,927,336 6,518,547 1,629,637 0 2.50% 334,075,520 6,681,510 1,670,378 0 2.50% 342,427,408 6,848,548 1,712,137 0 2.50% 350,988,093 7,019,762 1,754,940 0 2.5090 359,762,795 7,195,256 1,798,814 0 2.5090 368,756,865 7,375,137 1,843,784 0 2.5090 377,975,787 7,559,516 1,889,879 0 2.50",0 387,425,181 7,748,504 1,937,126 0 2.509. 397,110,811 7,942,216 1,965,554 0 2.5090 407,038,581 8,140,772 2,035,193 0 2.5006 417,214,546 8,344,291 2,086,073 0 2.50% 427,644,909 8,552,898 2,138,225 0 2.50% 438,336,032 8,766,721 2,191,680 0 7.5096 449,294,433 8,985,889 2,246,472 0 2.5096 460,526,794 9,210,536 2,302,634 0 2.50% 472,039,964 9,440,799 2,360,200 0 2.5096 483,840,963 9,676,819 2,419,205 0 2.5090 495,936,987 9,918,740 2,479,685 0 2.50% 508,335,411 10,166,708 2,541,677 0 2.50% 521,043,797 10,420,876 2,605,219 0 2.5090 534,069,892 10,681,398 2,670,349 0 2.5090 547,421,639 10,948,433 2,737,108 0 2.5090 561,107,180 11,222,144 2,805,536 0 2.50% 575,134,859 11,502,697 2,875,674 0 2.5095 589,513,231 11.790.265 2,947,566 0 2.5090 179,319,267 17.24% 16.3196 15.5175 14.8395 14.2396 13.70% 13.22%, 12.79% 12.41-o 12.05% 11.73% 11.4396 11.16% 10.9096 10.66% 10.1496 9.6790 9.2690 8.8995 8.56% 8.2796 8.00% 7.7596 7.53% 7.32% 7.13% 6.9696 6.80% 6.64% 6.5095 6.37% 6.2595 6.13% 6.0290 5.92% 5.83% 5.7396 5.65% 5.57% 5.49% 5.41".0 Total Secured, State Board and Uns •cured AV (7) (8) (9) (10) Secured State Unsecured Secured, AV Board AV State Board, Unsecured AV 42,029,264 0 6,672,601 48,701,865 67,856,371 0 7,669,515 75,525,886 79,552,780 0 7,669,515 87,222,295 91,791,600 0 7,669,515 99,461,115 104,592,640 0 7,669,515 112,262,155 117,976,362 0 7,669,515 125,645,877 131,963,900 0 7,669,515 139,633,415 146,577,080 0 7,669,515 154,246,595 161,838,441 0 7,669,515 169,507,956 t77,771,259 0 7,669,515 185,440,774 194,399,570 0 7,669,515 202,069,085 211,748,189 0 7,669,515 219,417,704 229,842,739 0 7,669,515 237,512,254 248,709,674 0 7,669,515 256,379,189 268,376,304 0 7,669,515 276,045,819 288,870,822 0 7,669,515 296,540,337 310,222,331 0 7,669,515 317,891,846 317,977,889 0 7,669,515 325,647,404 325,927,336 0 7,669,515 333,596,851 334,075,520 0 7,669,515 341,745,035 342,427,408 0 7,669,515 350,096,923 350,988,093 0 7,669,515 358,657,608 359,762,795 0 7,669,515 367,432,310 368,756,865 0 7,669,515 376,426,380 377,975,787 0 7,669,515 385,645,302 387,425,181 0 7,669,515 395,094,696 397,110,811 0 7,669,515 404,780,326 407,038,581 0 7,669,515 414,708,096 417,214,546 0 7,669,515 424,884,061 427,644,909 0 7,669,515 435,314,424 438,336,032 0 7,669,515 446,005,547 449,294,433 0 7,669,515 456,963,946 460,526,794 0 7,669,515 468,196,309 472,039,964 0 7,669,515 479,709,479 483,840,963 0 7,669,515 491,510,478 495,936,987 0 7,669,515 503,606,502 508,335,411 0 7,669,515 516,004,926 521,043,797 0 7,669,515 528,713,312 534,069,892 0 7,669,515 541,739,407 547,421,639 0 7,669,515 555,091,154 561,107,180 0 7,669,515 568,776,695 575,134,859 0 7,669,515 582,804,374 589.513,231 0 7,669,515 597.182.746 112,033,818 - -- - 179,319,267 - - - 179,319,267 - -_ - 179319.267 - Assumptions: Annual Inflationary Adjustment. 290 of Secured AV State Board Annual Increase: 090 Reassessed Property Assessments: 0.5% of Secured AV Unsecured AV Annual Increase: 0% New Developpment Assumptions: $10 million in constant FY 2005/06 dollars per year from FY 2005/06 to FY 2019/20 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table E -4A Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Rcpon Petnlumo Plan Amendments ad pistol Merger April 2006 Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadjusted Levies Pemloma Plan Amendmenw & Fiscal Nit,t,- CBD Added Area (ln Future Value or Nominal Dullms) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) City County County So Co Spring lake ZONE 2A Marin- Bay Arra Air Geneml General Library \Vater Park SCWA Not... Sonoma Quality Fund'^ Agrncy Basin Men, &VCD Mgmt Dist Yrar Fiscal General (N) Year Levv: 16.43°1 Levv: 27.8476 Levv: 1.86`h, Leve: 0.7596 Lev.: 0.2496 Levv: 1.58';6 Levv: 0.7496 Lev, 0.19% 5 2005/ 06 12,214 20,696 1,386 558 180 1,172 180 138 6 2006/ 07 16,159 27,381 1,833 738 238 1,551 238 183 7 2007/ 08 20,285 34,373 2,302 927 299 1,947 299 230 8 2008/ 09 24,600 41,684 2,791 1,124 363 2,361 363 278 9 2009/ 10 29,109 49,324 3,303 1,330 429 2,794 429 329 10 2010/ 11 33,819 57,306 3,837 1,545 498 3,246 499 383 11 2011/ 12 38,739 65,642 4,395 1,770 571 3,718 571 438 12 2012/ 13 43,875 81,484 5,456 2,197 709 4,615 709 544 13 2013/ 14 49,235 98,020 6,563 2,642 853 5,552 853 655 14 2014/ 15 54,827 115,274 7,719 3,107 1,003 6,529 1,003 770 15 2015/ 16 60,660 133,273 8,924 3,593 1,159 7,549 1,160 890 16 7016/ 17 66,742 152,042 10,180 4,099 1,323 8,612 1,323 1,016 17 2017/ 18 73;181 171,610 11,491 4,626 1,493 9,720 1,493 1,146 15 2018/ 19 79,687 192,004 12,856 5,176 1,670 10,875 1,671 1,283 19 2019/ 20 86,569 213,253 14,279 5,749 1,855 12,079 1,856 1,425 20 2020/ 21 88,978 227,322 15,Z21 6,128 1,977 12,876 1,978 1,519 21 7021/ 22 91,540 235,290 15,755 6,343 2,047 13,327 2,047 1,572 22 2022/ 23 94,165 243,458 16,302 6,563 2,118 13,789 2,119 1,626 23 2023/ 24 96,856 251,830 16,862 6,789 2,191 14,264 2,191 1,682 24 2024125 99,615 260,411 17,437 7,020 2,265 14,750 2,266 1,740 25 2025/ 26 102,442 269,207 18,026 7,257 2,342 15,248 2,343 1,798 26 2026/ 27 105,341 278,222 18,629 7,500 2,420 15,759 2,421 1,859 27 2027/ 28 108,311 287,463 19,248 7,749 2,501 16,282 2,501 1,920 28 2028/ 29 111,356 296,935 19,882 8,005 2,583 16,818 2,584 1,984 29 2029/ 30 114,477 306,644 20,532 8,266 2,667 17,368 2,668 2,048 30 2030/ 31 117,676 316,595 21,199 8,535 2,754 17,932 2,755 2,115 31 2031/ 32 120,955 326,796 21,882 8,810 2,843 18,510 2,844 2,183 32 2032/ 33 124,316 340,424 22,794 9,177 2,961 19,282 2,962 2,274 33 2033/ 34 127,761 354,394 23,730 9,553 3,083 20,073 3,084 2,367 34 2034/ 35 131,293 368,713 24,688 9,939 3,207 20,884 3,209 2,463 35 2035/ 36 134,912 383,389 25,671 101335 3,335 71,715 3,536 2,561 36 2036/ 37 138,622 398,433 26,678 10,741 3,466 22,567 3,467 2,662 37 2037/ 38 142,425 413,852 27,711 11,156 3,600 23,441 3,601 2,765 38 2038/ 39 146,322 429,658 28,769 11,58Z 3,737 24,336 3,739 2,870 39 2039140 150,318 445,858 29,854 12,019 3,878 25,253 3,880 2,978 40 2040/41 154,413 462,463 30,966 12,467 4,023 26,194 4,024 3,089 41 2041/42 158,610 479,484 32,105 12,926 4,171 27,158 4,172 3,203 42 2042/ 43 162,912 496,930 33,274 13,396 4,323 28,146 4X4 3,319 43 2043/ 44 167,322 514,812 34,471 13,878 4,478 29,159 4,480 3,439 44 2044/45 171,843 533,141 35,698 14,372 4,638 30,197 4,639 3,561 45 2045146 176,476 551,928 36,956 14,878 4,801 31,261 4,803 3,687 46 2046/47 181,225 571.185 38.246 15.398 4968 32.352 4.970 3.816 TOTAL 4,210,084 11.498,204 769,899 309.960 100,017 651,260 100,057 76,808 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 322,862 591,186 39,585 15,937 5,142 33,485 5,144 3,949 To: 20241 25 1,160,755 2,671,678 178,891 72,021 23,240 151,324 23,249 17,847 To: 2034/ 35 2,374,685 5,817,072 389,501 156,812 50,600 329,480 50,620 38,855 To: 2046/ 47 4,210,054 11,498,704 769,899 309,960 100,017 651,260 100,057 76,808 [A] The City's pass-through is lived only on the first tier of the ABI 290 pass-through. is shares of the second and third tiers are o,wined by the Auency. Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Rcpon Petnlumo Plan Amendments ad pistol Merger April 2006 Matumn Community Development Commission preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendmeals and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table E-413 Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadjusted Levies Pcmluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger - CBD Added Ar© (In Furore Value or Nominal Dollars) (9) (10) (I1) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) Southern So Pemluma City Petaluma City SO CO JT SCHOOL Pemluma SCHOOLS Total Co Res. Can Elem Jt High JUNIOR SERVICE ANUF EQUAL. Pus-Thmughs (Land Only) Junior ADMIN. AID Year Fiscal College (N) Year Lew: 0.0241, Lev,: 14.5476 Levv: 17.6976 Levu: 5.26% Lr,, 1.939ti Lav: 11.106, Levv: 0.3 H. Lew: 100.00;6 5 2005/ 06 17 10180{ 13,151 3,911 1,434 8,253 233 74,327 6 2006/ 07 22 14,294 17,399 5,175 1,897 10,919 309 98,336 7 2007/ 08 28 17,945 21,842 6,496 2,381 13,707 387 123,449 8 2008/ 09 34 21,761 26,488 7,878 2,888 16,623 470 149,704 9 2009/ 10 40 25,750 31,343 9,322 3,417 19,670 556 177,144 10 2010/ 11 46 29,917 36,415 10,831 3,970 22,853 646 205,811 11 2011/ 12 53 34,269 41,712 12,406 4,547 26,177 740 235,749 12 2012/ 13 66 42,540 51,778 15,400 5,645 32,494 91B 288,430 13 2013/ 14 79 51,172 62,286 18,525 6,790 39,088 1,105 343,418 14 2014/ 15 93 60,180 73,250 21,786 7,986 45,969 1,299 400,795 15 2015/ 16 108 69,576 84,687 25,188 9,232 53,147 1,502 460,647 16 2016/ 17 123 79,375 96,614 28,735 10,533 60,631 1,713 523,061 17 2017/ IS 139 89,590 109,048 32,433 11,888 68,435 1,934 588,127 18 2018/ 19 155 100,237 122,007 36,288 13,301 76,567 2,164 655,940 19 2019/ 20 172 111,330 135,509 40,304 14,773 85,041 2,403 726,597 20 2020/ 21 184 118,675 144,449 42,963 15,748 90,651 2,562 771,230 21 2021122 190 122,835 149,513 44,469 16,300 93,829 2,652 797,707 22 2022/ 23 197 127,099 154,703 46,012 16,865 97,086 2,744 BZ4,846 23 2023/ 24 203 131,470 160,023 47,594 17,445 100,425 2,838 852,663 24 2024125 210 135,950 165,475 49,216 18,040 103,847 2,935 881,176 25 2075/26 218 140,542 171,064 50,879 18,649 107,354 3,034 910,402 26 2026/ 27 225 145,248 176,793 52,582 19,274 110,949 3,135 940,358 27 2027/ 28 232 150,073 182,665 54,329 19,914 114,635 3,240 971,063 28 2028/29 240 155,017 188,684 56,119 20,570 118,412 3,346 1,002,536 29 2029/30 248 160,086 194,854 57,954 21,243 122,283 3,456 1,034,796 30 2030/31 256 165,281 201,177 59,835 21,932 126,25Z 3,568 1,067,862 31 2031/ 32 264 170,606 207.659 61,763 22,639 130,320 3,683 1,101,754 32 2032/ 33 275 177,721 216,319 64,338 23,583 135,754 3,836 1,146,019 33 2033/ 34 286 185,014 225,196 66,978 24,551 141,325 3,994 1,191,390 34 2034/ 35 298 192,490 234,294 69,685 25,542 147,035 4,155 1,237,895 35 2035/ 36 310 200,152 243.621 72,458 26,559 152,888 4,321 1,285,563 36 2036/ 37 322 208,005 253,180 75,302 27,601 158,887 4,490 1,334,423 37 2037/ 38 334 216,055 262,978 78,216 28,670 165,036 4,664 1,384,504 38 2038/39 347 224,306 273,021 81,203 29,764 171,339 4,847 1,435,837 39 2039/ 40 360 232,764 283,316 84,265 30,887 177,799 5,025 1,488,453 40 2040/ 41 374 241,433 293,867 87,403 32,037 184,421 5,212 1,542,385 41 2041/ 42 387 250,318 30403 90,620 33,216 191,208 5,404 1,597,665 42 2042/ 43 402 259,426 315,769 93,917 34,425 198,165 5,600 1,654,327 43 2043/ 44 416 268,762 377,132 97.297 35,663 205,297 5,802 1,712,406 44 2044/45 431 278,331 338,779 100,761 36,933 212,606 6,008 1,771,937 45 2045/ 46 446 288,139 350,717 104,311 38,235 220,098 6,220 1,832,956 46 2046/47 462 298.192 362.953 107.951 39.569 227.777 6.437 1 895.500 TOTAL 9,291 6,002,734 7306,410 2,173,097 796,535 4,585,252 129.581 38.719.189 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 478 308,633 375,663 111,731 40,954 235,753 6,662 2,097,164 To: 2024/ 25 2,159 1,394,772 1,697,689 504,932 185,080 1,065,411 30,109 9,179,158 To: 2034/35 4,701 3,036,851 3,696,396 1,099,394 402,976 2,319,731 65.557 19,783,232 To: 2046/47 9,291 6,002,734 7306,410 2,173,097 796,535 4,585,252 129.581 38,719,189 Matumn Community Development Commission preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendmeals and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table E -4C Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadluned levies Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fiscal Merger- CBD Added Area (In Present Value ut Cunstant 2005/06 Dollars) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) City Crum, Cnunty So Cu Spring lake ZONE 2A Marin. Bay Ar© Air General Geneml Library Water Park SCNA Petaluma Sonoma Quality Fund�Aj Agency Basin Mos, & VCD Mgmt Dist Year Fisml General (N) Year Les,: 16.4396 Lev, 27.8496 Levv: 1.86% Ls,, 07516 Ls,, 0.2496 Levv: 1.589N, Lev,: 0.2496 Levv: 0.19'9, 5 2005/06 12,214 20,696 1,386 558 180 1,172 ISO 138 6 2006107 15,317 25,954 1,738 700 226 1,470 226 173 7 2007/ 08 18,226 30,883 2,068 833 269 1,749 269 206 8 2008/09 20,950 35,499 2,377 957 309 2,011 309 237 9 2009/ 10 23,497 39,B15 2,666 1,073 346 2,255 346 266 10 2010/ 11 25.876 43,847 2,936 1,182 381 2,484 382 293 11 2011/ 12 28,095 47,607 3,188 I :B3 414 2,696 414 318 12 2012/ 13 30,161 56,015 3,751 1,510 487 3,173 487 374 13 2013/ 14 32,081 63,870 4,277 1,722 556 3,618 556 427 14 2014/ 15 33,863 71,197 4,767 11919 619 4,033 620 476 15 2015/ 16 35,512 78,022 5,224 2,103 679 4,419 679 521 16 2016/ 17 37,036 84,370 5,649 2,274 734 4,779 734 564 17 2017/ 18 38,439 90,264 6,044 2,433 785 5,113 785 603 IS 2018/ 19 39,729 95,726 6,410 Z,580 833 5,422 833 639 19 2019/20 40,910 100,777 6,748 2,717 B77 5,708 877 673 20 2020/ 21 39,856 101,825 6,818 2,745 886 5,767 886 680 21 2021/ 22 38,866 99,900 6,689 2,693 B69 5,658 869 667 22 2022/ 23 37,896 97,979 6,560 7,641 852 5,550 853 654 23 20731 24 36,947 96,064 6,432 2,590 836 5,441 836 642 24 2024/ 25 36,019 94,159 6,305 2,538 B19 5,333 819 629 25 2075/ 26 35,110 92,265 6,17B 2,4B7 803 5,226 803 616 26 2026/ Z7 34,221 90,384 6,052 2,436 786 5,119 787 604 27 20271 28 33,35Z 88,517 5,927 2,386 770 5,014 770 591 28 2028/ 29 32,502 86,667 5,803 2,336 754 4,909 754 579 29 2029/ 30 31,671 84,835 5,680 2,287 738 4,805 738 567 30 2030131 30,859 83,022 5,559 2,238 722 4,702 722 555 31 2031/ 32 30,065 81,229 5,439 2,190 707 4,601 707 543 32 2032/ 33 29,289 80,206 5,370 2,162 698 4,543 698 536 33 20331 34 28,532 79,144 5,299 2,134 688 4,483 689 529 34 2034/ 35 27,792 78,049 5,226 2,104 679 4,421 679 521 35 2035/ 36 27,069 76,925 5,151 2,074 669 4,357 669 514 36 20361 37 26,364 75,776 5,074 2,043 659 4,292 659 506 37 2037/38 25,675 74,605 4,995 2,011 649 4,226 649 498 38 2038/ 39 25,002 73,416 4,916 1,979 639 4,158 639 490 39 2039140 24,346 72,213 4,835 1,947 628 4,090 628 482 40 2040/ 41 23,705 70,997 4,754 1,914 618 4,021 618 474 41 2041/ 42 23,080 69,773 4,672 1,881 607 3,952 607 466 42 2042/ 43 22,471 68,542 4,589 1,848 596 3,881 596 458 43 2043/44 21,876 67,306 4,507 1,B14 585 3,812 586 450 44 2044/45 21,295 66,069 4,424 1,781 575 3,742 575 441 45 2045/46 20,729 64,831 4,341 1,748 564 3,672 564 433 46 2046/ 47 20,177 63.595. 4.258 1.714 553 3.602 553 425 TOTAL 1,216.673 3,062,831 205,082 82,566 26,642 173,479 26.653 20.460 Cumulative TO: 20141 15 240,280 435,382 29,152 11,737 3,787 24,660 3,789 7,908 To: 2024/ 25 621,490 1,374,467 92,032 37,052 11,956 77,850 11,961 9,181 To: 2034/ 35 934,883 2,218,785 148,566 59,812 19,300 125,672 19,308 14,8Z1 To: 2046/ 47 1,216,673 3,062,831 205,082 82,566 26,642 173,479 26,653 20,460 [A] The Cay's pass through is hexed only oa the first tier of the ABI 290 pass-through. Its shares of the second and third ,it. are remmed by the Agency. Present value discounted to FY 2005/06 so 5.596 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Appendix Table E4D Pass -Through Payments to Affected Taxing Entities Unadjusted Levies Petaluma Plan Amendments & Fisval Merger- CBD Added Ar© (In Present Value, 2005/06 Dollars) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) 116) Southern So Pcmluma City Petaluma City SO CO JT SCHOOL Pemlama SCHOOLS Tom] Ca Res. Co. Elem jt High JUNIOR SERVICE AWUF EQUAL. Pass-Thnu d s (Land Only) junior ADMIN. AID Year Fiscal College (N) Year Levv: 0.02'% Ler,: 14.5416 Lvv,: 17.69",,, Levv: 5.269F Levu: 1.93% Irv,: 11.10% Lvvv: 0.3 N,, 5 2005/ 06 17 10,804 13,151 3,911 1,434 8,253 233 74,327 6 2006/07 ZI 13,549 16,492 4,905 1,798 10,350 29Z 93,210 7 2007/ 08 25 16,123 19,624 5,837 2,139 12,315 348 110,913 8 2008/09 29 18,532 22,557 6,709 2,459 14,156 400 127,490 9 2009/ 10 32 20,786 25,300 7,525 2,758 15,878 449 142,994 10 2010/ 11 35 22,891 27,862 8,287 3,037 17,485 494 157,473 11 2011/ 12 38 24,854 30,251 81997 3,298 18,985 537 170,976 12 2012/ 13 45 29,243 35,594 10,5B7 3,880 22,338 631 198,278 13 2013/ 14 52 33,344 40,585 12,071 4,425 25,470 720 223,771 14 2014/ 15 5B 37.169 45,241 13,456 4,932 28,392 802 247,543 15 2015/ 16 63 40,732 49,578 14,746 5,405 31,114 879 269,677 16 2016/ 17 68 44,046 53,612 15,945 5,845 33,645 951 790,252 17 2017/ IS 73 47,123 57,357 17,059 6,253 35,995 1,017 309,344 18 2018/ 19 77 49,974 60,828 18,092 6,631 38,173 1,079 327,026 19 2039/ 20 81 52,611 64,037 19,046 6,981 40,188 1,136 343,367 20 2020/ 21 82 53,159 64,704 19,244 7,054 40,606 1,148 345,459 21 2021/ 22 81 52,154 63,480 18,881 6,921 39,838 1,126 338,691 22 2022/ 23 79 51,151 62,260 18,517 6,787 39,072 1,104 331,956 23 2023/ 24 78 50,151 61,043 18,156 6,655 38,309 1,083 325,262 24 2024/ 75 76 49,157 59,832 17,796 6,523 37,549 1,061 318,615 25 2025/ 26 75 48,168 58,629 17,438 6,392 36,793 1,040 312,021 26 2026/ 27 73 47,186 57,433 17,082 6,261 36,043 1,019 305,486 27 2027/ 28 72 46,211 56,247 16,729 6,132 35,299 998 299,015 28 2028/ 29 70 45,245 55,072 16,380 6,004 34,561 977 292,613 29 2029130 69 44,789 53,908 16,033 5,877 33,831 956 286,283 30 2030/31 67 43,342 52,755 15,691 5,751 33,107 936 280,029 31 2031/ 32 66 47,406 51,616 15,352 5,627 32,393 915 273,855 32 2032/ 33 65 41,872 50,966 15,158 5,556 31,984 904 270,007 33 2033/34 64 41,318 50,291 14,958 5,483 31,561 89Z 266,063 34 2034/35 63 40,746 49,595 14,751 5,407 31,124 880 262,037 35 2035/36 62 40,159 48,881 14,538 5,329 30,676 867 257,941 36 2036/ 37 61 39,559 48,151 14,321 5,249 30,218 854 253,786 37 2037/ 38 60 38,948 47,407 14,100 5,168 29,751 841 249,583 38 2038/ 39 59 38,327 46,651 13,875 5,086 29,277 827 245,343 39 2039/ 40 58 37,699 45,887 13,648 5,003 28,797 814 241,075 40 2040/ 41 57 37,065 45,114 13,418 4,918 28,312 800 236,786 41 2041/ 4Z 56 36,425 44.336 13,187 4,833 Z7,824 786 237,486 42 2042/ 43 55 35,783 43,554 12,954 4,748 27,333 772 228,182 43 2043/ 44 54 35,138 42,769 12,720 4,663 26,840 759 223,879 44 2044/ 45 53 34,492 41,983 12,487 4,577 26,347 745 219,585 45 2045/ 46 52 33,846 41,196 12,253 4,491 25,853 731 215,305 46 2046147 51 33.201 40.411 12,019 4,406 25.361 717 211.044 TOTAL 2,475 1,598,977 1,946,243 578,858 212,177 1.221395 34,517 10,409,028 Cumulative To: 2014/ 15 352 227,295 276,659 82,285 30,161 173,621 4,907 1,546,974 To: 20241 25 1,111 717,552 873,390 259,767 95,216 548,110 15,490 4,746,624 To: 2034/ 35 1,793 1,158,335 1,409,903 419,336 153,706 884,807 25,005 7,594,034 To: 20461 47 2,475 1,598,977 1,946,243 578,858 212,177 1,221,395 34,517 10,409,028 Petaluma Community Development Commission Preliminary Report Petaluma Plan Amendments and Fiscal Merger April 2006 Attachment 2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PETALUMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT TO FISCALLY MERGE PROJECT AREAS ��I (�7�[� _\ �1�►17i� I��11��75ii�117�1i/�i1[i�YIr'�r/:\►� The Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Community Development Project, adopted by Ordinance 1725 N.C.S. on July 18, 1988, and subsequently amended by Ordinance 1972 N.C.S. adopted November 21, 1994, Ordinance 2100 N.C.S. adopted April 3, 2000, and Ordinance 2183 N.C.S. adopted June 7, 2004 (as so amended, the "PCD Plan" or the "Plan') is hereby amended as set forth in this amendment (this "Amendment'), effective as of the effective date of the ordinance adopting this Amendment. SECTION 2. FISCAL MERGER Section VI.F is hereby added to the PCD Plan to read as follows: F. Fiscal Merger 1. Findings. The fiscal merger of the Petaluma Community Development Project Area ("PCD Project Area") and the Petaluma Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue is authorized by, consistent with, and will serve the legislative policies of, Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seg., in that such fiscal merger will result in substantial benefit to the public and will contribute to the revitalization of blighted areas through the increased economic vitality of such areas and through increased and improved housing and economic opportunities in or near such areas. 2. Fiscal Merger of Proiect Areas. Pursuant to, and for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue as described in Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seg., the PCD Project Area is hereby fiscally merged with the project area (the "CBD Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area, adopted by the City Council by Ordinance 1221 N.C.S. (as subsequently amended, the "CBD Plan'). The PCD Project Area and the CBD Project Area are each referred to herein as a "constituent project area." Except as otherwise stated herein, each reference in this Amendment to a constituent project area shall mean such project area as originally established and as such project area may have been amended to add territory. 816616-1 This section authorizes the taxes attributable to each constituent project area which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670(b) to be allocated for redevelopment in any of the constituent project areas for the purpose of paying the principal of, and interest on, indebtedness incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance, in whole or in part, the redevelopment project in any of the constituent project areas; except that any such taxes attributable to a particular constituent project area shall first be used to pay indebtedness in compliance with the terms of any bond resolution or other agreement pledging such taxes from that particular constituent project area which resolution or other agreement was adopted or approved by the Agency prior to the fiscal merger of the constituent project areas. Except as otherwise noted in this Section, tax increment revenue attributable to each constituent project area may be used for any lawful purpose in any of the constituent project areas. 3. Outstanding Bonded Indebtedness Limit. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section VLE.3 of the Plan, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33334.1, the amount of bonded indebtedness to be repaid in whole or in part from the combined allocation of taxes to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 from all of the constituent project areas which in the aggregate can be outstanding at any one time shall not exceed $250,000,000 in principal amount, except by amendment of this Plan and the redevelopment plan for the other constituent project areas. 4. Limitation on Allocation of Tax Increment. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section VI.E.I of the Plan, the taxes attributable to the constituent project areas that may be and are so allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670(b) after the effective date of this Amendment shall not exceed a cumulative total equal to the sum of the individual limits on the allocation of taxes to the Agency as set forth in the redevelopment plans for each constituent project area, except by amendment of this Plan and the redevelopment plans for the other constituent project areas. SECTION 3. EFFECT OF AMENDMENT All provisions of the Plan not specifically amended or repealed in this Amendment shall continue in full force and effect. If any provision of this Amendment or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Amendment, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Amendment are severable. The City Council of the City of Petaluma hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, 816616-1 2 subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable. SECTION 5. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The ordinance adopting this Amendment shall be published once, with the names of those City Couucilmembers voting for or against it, in the , a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Petaluma, as required by law, and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. 816616-1 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PETALUMA CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TO FISCALLY MERGE PROJECT AREAS SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF REDEVELOPMENT PLAN. The Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area, adopted by Ordinance 1221 N.C.S. on September 27, 1976, and subsequently amended by Ordinance 1973 N.C.S. adopted November 21, 1994, Ordinance 2092 N.C.S. adopted July 21, 1999, Ordinance 2116 N.C.S. adopted June 18, 2001, and Ordinance 2184 N.C.S. adopted June 7, 2004 (as so amended, the "CBD Plan' or the "Plan") is hereby amended as set forth in this amendment (this "Amendment'), effective as of the effective date of the ordinance adopting this Amendment. SECTION 2. FISCAL MERGER Section IXT is hereby added to the CBD Plan to read as follows: F. Fiscal Merger 1. Findings. The fiscal merger of the Petaluma Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area ("CBD Project Area") and the Petaluma Community Development Project Area for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue is authorized by, consistent with, and will serve the legislative policies of, Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., in that such fiscal merger will result in substantial benefit to the public and will contribute to the revitalization of blighted areas through the increased economic vitality of such areas and through increased and improved housing and economic opportunities in or near such areas. 2. Fiscal Merger of Proiect Areas. Pursuant to, and for the purpose of pooling tax increment revenue as described in Health and Safety Code Section 33485 et seq., the CBD Project Area is hereby fiscally merged with the project area (the "PCD Project Area") established and described in the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Community Development Project Area, adopted by the City Council by Ordinance 1725 N.C.S. (as subsequently amended, the "PCD Plan'). The CBD Project Area and the PCD Project Area are each referred to herein as a "constituent project area" Except as otherwise stated herein, each reference in this Amendment to a constituent project area shall mean such project area as originally established and as such project area may have been amended to add territory. 816650-1 This section authorizes the taxes attributable to each constituent project area which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670(b) to be allocated for redevelopment in any of the constituent project areas for the purpose of paying the principal of, and interest on, indebtedness incurred by the Agency to finance or refinance, in whole or in part, the redevelopment project in any of the constituent project areas; except that any such taxes attributable to a particular constituent project area shall first be used to pay indebtedness in compliance with the terms of any bond resolution or other agreement pledging such taxes from that particular constituent project area which resolution or other agreement was adopted or approved by the Agency prior to the fiscal merger of the constituent project areas. Except as otherwise noted in this Section, tax increment revenue attributable to each constituent project area may be used for any lawful purpose in any of the constituent project areas. 3. Outstanding Bonded Indebtedness Limit. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section XVI of the Plan, in accordance with Health and Safety Code Section 33334. 1, the amount of bonded indebtedness to be repaid in whole or in part from the combined allocation of taxes to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 from all of the constituent project areas which in the aggregate can be outstanding at any one time shall not exceed $250,000,000 in principal amount, except by amendment of this Plan and the redevelopment plan for the other constituent project areas. 4. Limitation on Allocation of Tax Increment. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth in Section IX.C.2 of the Plan, the taxes attributable to the constituent project areas that may be and are so allocated to the Agency pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670(b) after the effective date of this Amendment shall not exceed a cumulative total equal to the sum of the individual limits on the allocation of taxes to the Agency as set forth in the redevelopment plans for each constituent project area, except by amendment of this Plan and the redevelopment plans for the other constituent project areas. SECTION 3. EFFECT OF AMENDMENT All provisions of the Plan not specifically amended or repealed in this Amendment shall continue in full force and effect. SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Amendment or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Amendment, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Amendment are severable. The City Council of the City of Petaluma hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, 816650-I 2 subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable. SECTION 5. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE The ordinance adopting this Amendment shall be published once, with the names of those City Councilmembers voting for or against it, in the , a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Petaluma, as required by law, and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. 816650-1 Attachment 3 Resolution No. 2006 -XXX N.C.S. of the City of Petaluma, California ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT A PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE FORMED IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED FISCAL MERGER AND PLAN AMENDMENTS FOR THE PETALUMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT PROJECT AREA REDEVELOPMENT PLANS AND FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED FISCAL MERGER AND PLAN AMENDMENTS ARE EXEMPT FROM CEQA WHEREAS, the City Council originally approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area ("CBD Project Area") by Ordinance 1221 N.C.S. on September 27, 1976, and subsequently amended such redevelopment plan by Ordinance 1973 N.C.S. adopted November 21, 1994, Ordinance 2092 N.C.S. adopted July 21, 1999, Ordinance 2116 N.C.S. adopted June 18, 2001, and Ordinance 2184 N.C.S. adopted June 7, 2004 (as so amended, the "CBD Plan"); and, WHEREAS, the City Council originally approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Community Development Project (the "PCD Project Area") by Ordinance 1725 N.C.S. adopted on July 18, 1988, and subsequently amended such redevelopment plan by Ordinance 1972 N.C.S. adopted November 21, 1994, Ordinance 2100 N.C.S. adopted April 3, 2000, and Ordinance 2183 N.C.S. adopted June 7, 2004 (as so amended, the "PCD Plan"); and, WHEREAS, Petaluma Community Development Commission ("PCDC") staff and consultants have prepared proposed plan amendments that would effectuate a fiscal merger of the CBD Project Area and the PCD Project Area; and, WHEREAS, Health and Safety Code Section 33385 requires the formation of a Project Area Committee whenever a substantial number of low- or moderate -income persons reside within a redevelopment project area and either (i) the redevelopment plan will authorize use of eminent domain for the acquisition of property on which persons reside, or (ii) the redevelopment plan contains one or more public projects that will displace a substantial number of low- or moderate -income persons; and, WHEREAS, the proposed amendments do not affect the Agency's or the City's authority to use eminent domain to acquire property and do not provide for public projects that will displace a substantial number of low- and moderate -income persons; and, WHEREAS, PCDC and City Planning Department staff have determined that (i) the. fiscal merger, as a financing mechanism for unspecified future projects which will itself have no significant effect on the environment, is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b) (3); (ii) the potential environmental effects of the redevelopment plans were analyzed in previously certified environmental impact reports, including the Petaluma General Plan Environmental Impact Report, the program level EIR for the Central Petaluma Specific Resolution No. 2006 -XXX N.C.S. Page 1 Plan, the PCD Project EIR and the CBD Plan Amendment EIR; and (iii) the proposed plan amendments do not propose new projects, will not alter the implementation of the Redevelopment Plans, do not propose any land use changes to those already analyzed in the current General Plan, and do not modify the existing Redevelopment Programs. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Petaluma hereby: Section 1. Finds that the formation of a Project Area Committee is not required because the proposed amendments do not affect the Agency's or the City's authority to use eminent domain and do not propose public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of low- and moderate -income households. Section 2. Finds that the proposed amendments and fiscal merger are exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because (i) the fiscal merger is a financing mechanism for unspecified future projects and will itself have no significant effect on the environment, (ii) the potential environmental effects of the redevelopment plans were analyzed in previously certified environmental impact reports, including the Petaluma General Plan Environmental Impact Report, the program level EIR for the Central Petaluma Specific Plan, the PCD Project EIR and the CBD Plan Amendment EIR, and (iii) the proposed amendments do not propose new projects, will not alter the implementation of the Redevelopment Plans, do not propose any land use changes to those already analyzed in the current General Plan, and do not modify the existing Redevelopment Programs. REFERENCE: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Under the power and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City. I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Council of the City of Petaluma at a Regular meeting on the 17°i day of April, 2006, by the following vote: Vice Mayor Canevaro, Harris, Healy, Nan, O'Brien, Tortiatt None Mayor Glass None City Clerk Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Resolution No. 2006 -XXX N.C.S. Page 2 Attachment 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2006 -XX PETALUMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY REPORT ON PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS AND FISCAL MERGER, APPROVING DRAFT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS, AUTHORIZING TRANSMITTAL OF THE REPORT AND THE DRAFT PLAN AMENDMENTS TO AFFECTED TAXING ENTITIES, THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND INTERESTED PARTIES; ADOPTING FINDINGS THAT A PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE IS NOT REQUIRED AND THAT THE PROPOSED FISCAL MERGER AND PLAN AMENDMENTS ARE EXEMPT FROM CEQA; AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER ADOPTION OF ORDINANCES THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THE TIME LIMIT FOR DEBT INCURRENCE IN THE PCD PROJECT AREA AND CBD ORIGINAL PROJECT AREA AND EXTEND THE TIME LIMITS FOR PLAN EFFECTIVENESS AND RECEIPT OF TAX INCREMENT IN THE CBD ORIGINAL PROJECT AREA WHEREAS, the Petaluma Community Development Commission ("PCDC") has been designated as the official redevelopment agency in the City of Petaluma to carry out the functions and requirements of the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) ("CRL"); and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Petaluma (the "City Council") originally approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Central Business District Redevelopment Project Area ("CBD Project Area") by Ordinance 1221 N.C.S. on September 27, 1976, and subsequently amended such redevelopment plan by Ordinance 1973 N.C.S. adopted November 21, 1994, Ordinance 2092 N.C.S. adopted July 21, 1999, Ordinance 2116 N.C.S. adopted June 18, 2001, and Ordinance 2184 N.C.S. adopted June 7, 2004 (as so amended, the "CBD Plan"); and, WHEREAS, the City Council originally approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the Petaluma Community Development Project (the "PCD Project Area") by Ordinance 1725 N.C.S. adopted on July 18, 1988, and subsequently amended such redevelopment plan by Ordinance 1972 N.C.S. adopted November 21, 1994, Ordinance 2100 N.C.S. adopted April 3, 2000, and Ordinance 2183 N.C.S. adopted June 7, 2004 (as so amended, the "PCD Plan"); and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33344.5, PCDC staff and consultants have prepared a Preliminary Report which describes and analyzes existing conditions in the CBD Project Area and the PCD Project Area, the financial resources and projected revenue available to carry out redevelopment activities in the project areas, and the proposed fiscal merger of the project areas and amendment of the redevelopment plans; and, WHEREAS, PCDC staff and consultants have prepared proposed plan amendments that would effectuate a fiscal merger of the CBD Project Area and the PCD Project Area; and, WHEREAS, CRL Section 33385 requires the formation of a Project Area Committee whenever a substantial number of low- or moderate -income persons reside within a redevelopment project area and either (i) the redevelopment plan will authorize use of eminent domain for the acquisition of property on which persons reside, or (ii) the redevelopment plan contains one or more public projects that will displace a substantial number of low- or moderate -income persons; and, PCDC Resolution 2006 -XX Page 1 WHEREAS, the proposed amendments do not affect the Agency's or the City's authority to use eminent domain to acquire property and do not provide for public projects that will displace a substantial number of low- and moderate -income persons; and, WHEREAS, PCDC and City Planning Department staff have determined that (i) the fiscal merger, as a financing mechanism for unspecified future projects which will itself have no significant effect on the environment, is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b) (3); (ii) the potential environmental effects of the redevelopment plans were analyzed in previously certified environmental impact reports, including the Petaluma General Plan Environmental Impact Report, the program level EIR for the Central Petaluma Specific Plan, the PCD Project EIR and the CBD Plan Amendment EIR; and (iii) the proposed plan amendments do not propose new projects, will not alter the implementation of the Redevelopment Plans, do not propose any land use changes to those already analyzed in the current General Plan, and do not modify the existing Redevelopment Programs; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to CRL Section 33333.6(e) (2) (B), redevelopment plans adopted prior to 1994 can be amended to repeal the time limit for establishing debt by the adoption of an ordinance; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to SB 1096, upon the adoption of specified findings, the City Council may by adoption of an ordinance, amend the CBD Plan to extend by two years the plan effectiveness limit and the time period within which the Agency may receive tax increment and repay indebtedness for the original CBD Project Area. NOW, THEREFORE, the Petaluma Community Development Commission hereby: Section 1. Approves the Preliminary Report to Council in the form on file with the City Clerk and authorizes transmittal of the Preliminary Report to affected taxing entities, the Planning Commission and interested parties. Section 2. Approves the proposed Plan Amendments in the form on file with the City Clerk and authorizes transmittal of the proposed Plan Amendments to affected taxing entities, the Planning Commission and interested parties. Section 3. Finds that the formation of a Project Area Committee is not required because the proposed amendments do not affect the Agency's or the City's authority to use eminent domain and do not propose public projects that will cause displacement of a substantial number of low- and moderate -income households. Section 4. Finds that the proposed amendments and fiscal merger are exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b) (3) because (i) the fiscal merger is a financing mechanism for unspecified future projects and will itself have no significant effect on the environment, (ii) the potential environmental effects of the redevelopment plans were analyzed in previously certified environmental impact reports, including the Petaluma General Plan Environmental Impact Report, the program level EIR for the Central Petaluma Specific Plan, the PCD Project EIR and the CBD Plan Amendment EIR, and (iii) the proposed amendments do not propose new projects, will not alter the implementation of the Redevelopment Plans, do not propose any land use changes to those already analyzed in the current General Plan, and do not modify the existing Redevelopment Programs. Section 5. Recommends that the City Council consider adoption of the required findings and adoption of an ordinance extending the plan effectiveness and tax increment collection time limits pursuant to SB 1096 concurrently with the Council's consideration of the proposed plan amendments and fiscal merger. PCDC Resolution 2006 -XX Page 2 Section 6. Recommends that the City Council consider adoption of ordinances to repeal the time limit for establishing debt in the CBD Original Project Area and the PCD Project Area concurrently with the Council's consideration of the proposed plan amendments and fiscal merger. Adopted this 17th day of April, 2006 by the following vote: Commissioner Vice Chair Canevaro Chair Glass Harris Healy Nou O'Brien Torliatt ATTEST: Claire Cooper, Recording Secretary Aye No Absent Abstain Keith Canevaro, Vice Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM: Eric W. Donly, General Counsel PCDC Resolution 2006 -XX Page 3