The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Bill 05/07/2001 (5) IMAY A 7 2001 ;2PCDC• • • CITY OF- PETALUNIA CALIFORNIA MEMORANDUM u . City.Manager.'s'OUce,1 1 English Street,.'Petaluma, CA 94952. (707) 778-4345• Fax(707) 778-4419 E-mail.:eitjmenaci petaluma.ca.us, • DATE: May 3, 2001 . — - TO: To: Fred Stouder;City Manager • FROM Paul:Marangella,-Director of Econornic Development & Redevelopment SUBJECT: Response•totrestions from Commissioner Moynihan The following responds to the questions from`PCDC= member Moynihan pertaining,,to Redevelopment Agenda Item #2 on the May 2001.PCDC Agenda: "Discussion and Action to Approve Agreement: _for' Services with CSW/Stuber-Stroeh for Final Design,• Planning and Construction. Engineering/Bid Preparation and-Documentation. for the Construction of Several Segments of:the-Petaluma River-Access & Enhancement Plan Questions &-An"swers. • Question #1: What-action by the Commission initiated this project? Answer: a On April 3, 2001 the,PCDC Adopted b.the •'Five-Year Implementation Plan" which identified this project on page 10, item d. On June 26, 2000, the PCDC adopted the FY 2000-01 PCDC Budget containing funding for the first phase of the -- project on page 21, account902-9876. c. On April 16,2001, the.PCDC approved ;a . new "Five-Year Implementation Plan" which•was contained in the'Report to Council, ' pertaining to theCBDcPIan Amendment, dated,April 2001, Appendix G. d. Also of note are the Council Prionties"ofboth January 30, 1999 and March 1$, 2000: • Implement River Plan Segments; — Question#2: What was the;rational behind including,some segments of the River Enhancement Plan andeliminating others inthe scope:of work? Answer: The scope of work-covers the:design and engineering for River segments.from Lynch Creek to"D" Street. Segments which were chosen for the:first phase of design and engineering were those which have a high impact,on: —. • • economic:development; e pedestrian/bicycle movement &'safety, • • • ••' enhancement.of River amenities and;the downtown. • . In addition, the selected segments havetbeen the subject;of a highiegree'of community discussion and support, both as part of the process required for the adoption•of the "Petaluma River-Access &Enhancement Plan";andthe."'Central Petaluma Specific Plan." Questiont#3: •D6.;we have a cost estimate for the designan engineering :of engineeiinof the Other- . segments? •- Answer ,No. We,do;not,have a current estimate for'the;remaining;segments. •Question;#4: po we have a'`ballpark" estimate:for the construction costs? Land • acquisition costs? Annual.operating and maintenance costs? Answer: The construction costs for;the segments being considered.in the proposal are . estimated+at$8,7 Million, as cited on pages 8.and.9 of the May 7`h -staff report. This ' funding•is=included in the "Five ,Year'Implementation Plan". Land acquisition;costs are included'inthatcfigure and will'be,refined'as the,design is completed:'byCSW Stuber Stroeh. Annual operating'and maintenance costs:will'-be;estimated when£the design is completed by CSW Stuber-Stroeh. Question;#5. Would youp ease provide the�Commission with a copyof the:RFP" ,Answer: Please find a copy of the RFP attached: • • Question#6: How much of this work is not;directly associated`with theiproposed river trail? Answer: All of this'work,is directly associated withthe implementation of the- "Petaluma River Access & Enhancement Plan: Questiont#,7. Arethe Water.Street:infrastructuresupgrades includedinthe Downtown • Project Segment? IFsso,please provide a site map,ofthe•'project'that show`s-all properties - within a 500-footradius•so we may determuie:potential conflicts of-interest. Ans'w'er: The'Water-°Street infrastructure improvements;are included in:the Downtown Segment;of the project. A map Ishowiqg a 500-ft-radius_from the'project is not available at this timeand has'been;requested,fromengineering. .Question#8: What"-other grants and funding,sources are potentially available for this • work? Answer:. Rule 20 funding for the undergrounding of utilities is•available. Traffic. - Mitigation fees cbuld,beiavailable depending upon;final design:for traffictifenlation. • Question#9:.'Has the City`of PCDC applied for any regional, state, or federal funding sources;fora portion ofthis;project? Answer: The City`has applied for$100,000 of T-21 funding for a:pedestrian:bridge; across`Washington Creek. Iry In addition, the 00;for improvements to-the-path along>the:-River. Question#10: What'is the precedent for implementing aSpecific Plan Which has'not— undergene.publisieview or,adoption? - • 4 Answer: Not sure about thebquestion. The Petaluma River Access & Enhancement Plan •was adopted in May 1996. Prior to'that,,a 19-member Petaluma Citizen Advisory Committee had been appointed by,the-City Council and field numerous meetings,and • hearings. Question#11: While the:proposed PCDC '`Five-Year Implementation Plan" was included in the April 16, 200;14 Commission!packet, I doo-not`believe it was discussed or adopted. Would you please provide thetCommission.with,'theminutes of the meeting showing otherwise? _ Answer: At the meeting of,'April 15, 2001, legal counsehmentioned:that a requirement of the "Report to Council"`is'that the,report contain a"Five-Year Implementation Plan''. When the "Report to Council" was,approved, the Plan;was:approved. You may recall, several members of the PCDC stepped down because•of potential'conflicts of interest associated with the projects in'the 'Five-Year Implementation Pisan". While the minutes of the meeting have-not'yet beenprepared, attached please'•find`a,resolution which approved the "Report to Council". Question #12: What portions•of thistprojectareincluded in the Draft 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)? When is the 5-Year CIP scheduled-to'be adopted by the City Council? Answer: PCDC-projects are not included in the City's 5'Year CIP-as-they are:referred to in-the Agency's 'Five-Year Implementation Plan": The City's 5-Year'CIP will`be available as part of•the City's budgef:pf cess:, - • Please let me know•how•I can-assist.yo furthenin.this matte • • • • • • RESOLUTION #.2001- . • PETALUMA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION A.RESOLUTION APPROVING.AND'ACCEPTING THE REPORT TO THECITY COUNCIL-ON THEPROPOSED • • SECOND AMENDMENT TO'THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN,AND•THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT;REPORT • WHEREAS, the, City Council iofithe city:of:Petalurita;is in:the process [of adopting a Second Ainendinerit ;to the Redeveloprfient Plan, for the, Central, Business District Redevelopment Project Area-(the "Project Area'); and WHEREAS, the:'Petaluma Community Development 'Commission (the.'"PCDC") is preparing a Second Amendment to the Central Business, District Redevelopment Plan; and WHEREAS, •Section.33352 of the,California:Community Redevelopment;Law (Health & Safety Code Section 33000 et seq,) requires that the PCDC prepare a report`on the • • :proposed Second Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan; and - _ WHEREAS, the:PCDC has caused:to be prepared and has reviewed a,Report to-the City Council on the proposed Second Amendment to the Central Business District -- Redevelopment Plan; and - • WHEREAS, 'the Petaluma Community Redevelopment •Commission istaff and consultants completed the preparation of :the Final Environmental Impact Report "FEIR").pursuant to the°CalifomiaEnvironmentalQuality Act ("CEQA"). NOW; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Petaluma Community Development Commission does.herebY resolve,as follows: 1, They PCDC hereby approves and adopts the Report, on the Second Antendrhentto the Central Business Distnct;Redevelopment:Plan:and the FEIR, attached hereto by reference`and mad&a part,hereof. • 2. The ,Executive Director of.the Petaluma Community 'Redevelopment Commission is hereby authorized and directed to transmit the Report, the FEIR and''the _ . Second Amendment to the Central Business District Redevelopment Plan to the City • Council. • • City of Petaluma,California . 5/4/01 • I hereby certify that the foregoiagResolutioniNo. was duly introduced and• adopted by the .Petaluma Community Relevelopment_ Commission at a regular meeting.held on April 16,2001, by the following vote: Cdriarnissioner Aye No Absent • 'Thompson • =- Cader-Thompson _Healy ..Maguire Moynihan O'Brien . -- Torliatf E. Clark Thompson, Chairman ATTEST: • Bever1y.J. Kline, Recording Secretary • • • City of Petaluma,California • 5/4/01