Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - City Council - 1996-06-04 126 City Council, Regular Meeting City Council Chambers 1313 California Street Redding, California June 4, 1996 7:00 p.m. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by Clay McClain. The Invocation was offered by Pastor Don Farley, Bethel Church. The meeting was called to order by Mayor McGeorge with the following Council Members present: P. Anderson, R. Anderson, Kehoe, Murray and McGeorge. Also present were City Manager Warren, Assistant City Manager Perry, City Attorney Wingate, Director of Administrative Services Starman, Public Works Director Galusha, Electric Utility Director Lindley, Fire Chief Wagner,Development Services Director Swanson, Community Services Director Gorman, Finance Officer Strong, General Services Director Masingale, Human Resources Manager Bachman, Acting Building Official Gungl, Senior Planner Hanson, Associate Planner Morgon, Associate Planner Haddox, Management Analyst Dent, Assistant City Clerk Moscatello, City Clerk Strohmayer, and Secretary to the City Council Rudolph. PRESENTATION OF APPRECIATION PLAQUE - Richard Gulack, Airports Commission (B-080-010) Mayor McGeorge expressed the City's appreciation to Richard Gulack for his service on the Airports Commission from January 5, 1988, to May 1, 1996, and presented him with a plaque. Mr. Gulack thanked the City Council for the privilege of serving on the Commission. CONSENT CALENDAR The following matters were considered inclusively under the Consent Calendar: Approval of Payroll and Accounts Payable Register (A-050-100-500) It is recommended that Accounts Payable Register No. 22, for the period of May 21, 1996, through May 30, 1996, check numbers 233094 through 233606 inclusive, in the amount of$3,813,650.47, and Payroll Register No. 24, check numbers 418589 through 419225 inclusive, and electronic deposit transaction numbers 29614 through 29883, totaling $1,248,659.74, for the period May 5, 1996, through May 18, 1996, be approved. TOTAL: $5,062,310.21 Treasurer's Report - April 1996 (A-050-100-600) Total Treasurer's Accountability - $ 86,018,485.05 Total City of Redding Funds, Funds Held in Trust and Funds of Related Entities - $215,498,127.20 ACR1 13 Report and Cash Reconciliation (F-205-095-650) It is the recommendation of the Finance Officer that the ACR113 Report and Cash Reconciliation for April 30, 1996, be accepted. Ordinance No. 2149 - re Amending Title 6 of the Redding Municipal Code re Business Licenses (Anniversary Renewals) (L-070-100) It is recommended that Ordinance No. 2149 be adopted, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Redding amending portions of Redding Municipal Code Chapters 6.02 (Business Licenses), 6.04 (License Fee Schedule) and 6.32 (Vehicles for Hire). 06/04/96 127 Response to Shasta County Grand Jury Report No. 7 (B-080-600-800) It is the recommendation of the Assistant City Manager that the City Council authorize the Mayor to send the letter dated June 5, 1996, incorporated herein by reference, in response to Shasta County Grand Jury Report No. 7. Property Status Report (C-070) It is the recommendation of the Assistant City Manager that the City Council accept the Property Status Report for May 1996 covering the following areas: (1) Surplus City Property; (2) Offers to sell land to the City; (3) City initiated purchases of land; and (4) Leases of City land. Request to Acquire City Property - by Jerry Hilburn (Victor and Hartnell Avenues) (C-070-200) It is the recommendation of the Assistant City Manager that the City Council authorize staff to refer Jerry Hilburn's request to acquire approximately 9,360 square feet of City land located at the southwest corner of Victor and Hartnell Avenues to all City departments and the Planning Commission to determine if the area can be declared surplus. Support of Assembly Bill 2828 (Sweeney) (L-040-300) It is the recommendation of the Assistant City Manager that the City Council ratify the Mayor's action in sending a letter dated May 23, 1996, incorporated herein by reference, to appropriate legislators in support of Assembly Bill 2828. Addendum to Utility Pay Station Agreement - with North State Grocery, Inc. (A-050-700) It is the recommendation of the Administrative Services Director that the City Council approve the Addendum to the Utility Pay Station Operator Agreement with North State Grocery, Inc., dba Holiday Quality Foods, effective April 1, 1996, thereby moving the pay station location from 3280 Bechelli Lane to 2455 Hartnell Avenue. Resolution - re Renewal of Liability Claims Administration Agreement with Gregory B. Bragg & Associates (R-100-550) It is the recommendation of the Administrative Services Director that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 96-110, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding extending the term of the Liability Services Agreement between the City of Redding and Gregory B. Bragg & Associates, Inc. from July 1, 1996, through June 30, 1999. Resolution- Amending Memorandum of Understanding with International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Union - re Addition of Classifications of Transfer Station Operator and Transfer Station Worker (P-100-050-070) It is the recommendation of the Administrative Services Director that Resolution No. 96-111 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding amending Exhibits A, B and C to the IBEW, AFL-CIO, Local 1245, Maintenance Employees, Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to add the classifications of Transfer Station Operator and Transfer Station Worker. Lease Amendment - Xerox (A-070-090) It is the recommendation of the Administrative Services Director that the City Council approve the amendment of the existing lease agreement with Xerox to take advantage of the combined cost per copy($.02110) and single itemized invoicing of all photocopies. 06/04/96 128 Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 2989, Maintenance Contract for Landscape Maintenance Districts A, B, and C (B-050-100 & A-170-075-050 & A-170-075-051 & A-170-075-052) It is the recommendation of the Development Services Director that Bid Schedule No. 2989, maintenance contract for Landscape Maintenance Districts A, B, and C, be awarded to the Yard Manicurist in the following amounts: District A - $15,880; District B - $15,910; and District C - $110. Resolution - Ordering Abatement of Property at 1023 State Street, owned by Elouise and Hugh Shuffleton (A-030-070) It is the recommendation of the Development Services Director that Resolution No. 96-112 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving the Report and Findings of the Board of Appeals, and ordering the abatement of the unsafe and unsightly building(s) and debris on property at 1023 State Street, owned by Elouise and Hugh Shuffleton. Resolution - Intention to Begin Abatement Proceedings at 10 Hilltop Drive, owned by Lois Marsh (A-030-070) It is the recommendation of the Development Services Director that Resolution No. 96-113 be adopted, a resolution of intention of the City Council of the City of Redding to begin legal proceedings of abatement on the real property located at 10 Hilltop Drive, owned by Lois Marsh. Air Quality Grant Agreement for Fiscal Year 1996-97 (G-100 & E-020-010) It is the recommendation of the Development Services Director that the City Council accept the Air Quality Management Work Program for Fiscal Year 1996-97 as presented and authorize the City Manager to enter into a Grant Agreement with the Air Quality Management District to accomplish the tasks contained in said program. Set Public Hearing- re Rezoning Application RZ-13-95, by Azi Barzin (19350 Hobo Lane & 11489 Ridgewood Drive) (L-010-230) It is the recommendation of the Development Services Director that a public hearing be set for 7:00 p.m., June 18, 1996, to consider the request to rezone property located at 19350 Hobo Lane and 11489 Ridgewood Drive from "R1-B15" and "R1-B20" Single-Family Residential District to "R1- BFM" Single-Family Residential District. Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 3006, Electronic Recording Meters (B-050-100) It is the recommendation of the Electric Utility Director that Bid Schedule No. 3006, electronic recording meters for fiscal year 1996-97, be awarded to Westinghouse Electric Supply Company, in the amount of$42,038. Funds for this purchase are included in the proposed 1996-97 budget. Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 3008, Chemical & Consulting Service, Boiler& Cooling Tower Related Chemicals, Storage& Equipment for Redding Power (B-050-100) It is the recommendation of the Electric Utility Director that Bid Schedule No. 3008, chemical and consulting service, boiler and cooling tower related chemicals, storage and equipment for Redding Power, be awarded to the evaluated low bidder, Garret Calahan Company, for a two-year period in the amount of$40,430.66. Funds for this service are available in Job Order No. 4824-22. Agreement- re Modification of Natural Gas Service Agreement with Pacific Gas& Electric (C-3231) (E-120-150) It is the recommendation of the Electric Utility Director that the City Council approve the modification of the Natural Gas Service Agreement with Pacific Gas& Electric from Interruptible Intrastate Gas Transportation Service to Firm Intrastate Natural Gas Transportation Service and authorize the City Manager to sign the necessary documents and exhibits. 06/04/96 129 Agreement-Redding Community Access Corporation for Management of Channel 11, Public Access Station (T-040-350-200 & B-080-120 & P-100) It is the recommendation of the Community Services Director that the City Council approve the three-year funding Agreement for Services with the Redding Community Access Corporation commencing on July 1, 1996. Purchase Order - Temporary Personnel at Redding Community Access Corporation (T-040-350-200) It is the recommendation of the Community Services Director that the City Council authorize Purchase Order No. 053715 for temporary personnel at Redding Community Access Corporation to be increased to $28,500 to provide for the completion of privatization. Resolution - Serious Habitual Offender Program Grant Re-Application (G-100-170 & P-150-150) It is the recommendation of the Police Chief that Resolution No. 96-114 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding authorizing the filing of the necessary documentation to continue the City of Redding Serious Habitual Offender Program for a fourth year. Resolution - re Purchase of Police Portable Radios from Motorola Resolution - Appropriating Funds * (B-130-070 & B-050-100 & P-150-150) It is the recommendation of the Police Chief that Resolution No. 96-115 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding authorizing the purchase of police portable radios from Motorola, in the not to exceed amount of$75,800.00, pursuant to Redding Municipal Code Section 4.20.120(H)(2). It is further recommended that Resolution No. 96-116 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving and adopting the 41st amendment to City Budget Resolution No. 95-153 increasing appropriations by $75,800 for the purchase of radio equipment. Request for Proposal - Security Services at City and RABA Locations (B-050-100) It is the recommendation of the General Services Director that staff be directed to issue a Request for Proposals for security services at various City and Redding Area Bus Authority locations. Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 2999, Liquid Chlorine (B-050-100) It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No. 2999, liquid chlorine for fiscal year 1996-97, be awarded to All Pure Chemical Company of Tracy, CA in the amount of $390 per ton for ten or more tons, $399 per ton for four to nine tons, and $409 per ton for one to four tons. Funds for this purchase have been requested in the 1996-97 budget. Resolution - Award Contract for Professional Services re Lake Redding Bridge Project (B-050-020 & S-070-050-100) It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Resolution No. 96-117 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving entering into an authorization for professional services contract with MTI Testing Laboratory, Inc. for materials testing and/or inspection services related to the Lake Redding Bridge Project, in an amount not to exceed $39,263. Resolution- Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans re Signalization of SR299 at Buenaventura Blvd. (T-080-700 & S-050-100) It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Resolution No. 96-118 be adopted, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Redding approving entering into Cooperative Agreement No. 02365-277814 with Caltrans for the construction of signalization on State Route 299 at the intersection of Buenaventura Boulevard. 06/04/96 130 Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 3010, Parkview Neighborhood Project (B-050-020) It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No. 3010 (Job No. 8650- 35), Parkview Neighborhood Project, be awarded to N & T Digmore in the amount of$98,445.90, an additional $5,000 be approved to cover the cost of field engineering and inspection fees, and $5,000 be approved to provide a construction contingency fund, for a total of$108,445.90. Funding for this Community Development Block Grant project, comes solely from CDBG funds. Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 3002, Rock & Mineral Products (B-050-100) It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No. 3002, rock and mineral products for fiscal year 1996-97, be awarded as follows: Item Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 15 to Northstate Asphalt, Item Nos. 2, 11, 14, 18, 20, 21, and 22 to J. F. Shea Co.; Item Nos. 7, 16, and 17 to Crystal Creek Aggregate; Item Nos. 8, 19, and 23 to Dan Palmer Trucking; and Item Nos. 9, 10 and 13 to Westside Aggregate. Funds for these purchases have been requested in the 1996-97 budget. Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 3001, Water Meters (B-050-100) It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No. 3001, water meters for fiscal year 1996-97, be awarded as follows: Item Nos. 1, 4, 5 and 9 to Pacific Water Works of Puyallup, WA; Item Nos. 2, 3, and 8 to Badger Meter, Inc. of San Jose, CA; Item No. 6 to Camilla Valley Supply of Sacramento, CA; and Item No. 7 to Muller Company of Fullerton, CA. Funds for these purchases have been requested in the 1996-97 budget. Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 3000, Blended Sodium Phosphate (B-050-100) It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No. 3000, blended sodium phosphate for fiscal year 1996-97, be awarded to Kjell Corporation of Beloit, WI in the amount of $5.90 per gallon. Funds for these purchases have been requested in the 1996-97 budget. Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 2998, Liquid Cationic Polymer (B-050-100) It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No. 2998, liquid cationic polymer for fiscal year 1996-97, be awarded to Calgon Corporation of Pittsburgh, PA in the amount of$0.334 per pound. Funds for these purchases have been requested in the 1996-97 budget. Award of Bid - Bid Schedule No. 2997, Liquid Sulfur Dioxide (B-050-100) It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that Bid Schedule No. 2997 (Job Nos. 5330- 33 and 5340-33), liquid sulfur dioxide for fiscal year 1996-97, be awarded to All Pure Chemical Co. in the amount of $509 per ton for one to four containers, and $489 per ton for five or more containers. Funds for these purchases have been requested in the 1996-97 budget. Acceptance of Improvements-Tierra Oaks Planned Development, Unit 3 (Northwest of Old Oregon Trail near the intersection of Bear Mountain Road) (L-010-211-002) It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that the improvements in the Tierra Oaks Planned Development, Unit 3, be accepted as satisfactorily completed and the City Clerk instructed to return the securities to the developer, Tierra Oaks, Ltd. MOTION: Made by Council Member R. Anderson, seconded by Council Member P. Anderson, that all the foregoing items on the Consent Calendar be accepted, approved and adopted as recommended. Voting was as follows: Ayes: Council Members - P. Anderson, R. Anderson, Kehoe, Murray and McGeorge Noes: Council Members - None Absent: Council Members -None Resolution Nos. 96-110, 96-111, 96-112, 96-113, 96-114, 96-115, 96-116, 96-117, and 96-118 and Ordinance No. 2149 are on file in the office of the City Clerk. 06/04/96 131 LETTER OF RESIGNATION - Jeannine Johnson-Clements - Senior Citizens Facility Advisory Commission (B-080-450) MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member Murray, to accept Jeannine Johnson-Clements' resignation from the Senior Citizens Facility Advisory Commission. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes At the hour of 7:05 p.m., Chair Kehoe called to order the special meeting of the Redding Redevelopment Agency with the following Members present: P. Anderson, R. Anderson, Murray and Kehoe. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING - re SHASTEC Redevelopment Area Project (R-030-200) The hour of 7:00 p.m. having arrived, Mayor McGeorge opened the joint public hearing with the Redding City Council and the Redding Redevelopment Agency (Agency) regarding the SHASTEC Redevelopment Area Project. Associate Planner Haddox entered the following documents into the record: (1) Exhibit 1 - Affidavit of Publication of Notice of Joint Public Hearing, published once a week for four successive weeks in the Redding Record Searchlight as required by Sections 33349 and 33361 of the Health and Safety Code; Exhibit 2 - Certificate of Mailing Notice to Property Owner, together with a map indicating properties that are potentially subject to acquisition by the Agency, to each assessee of land in the Project Area as shown on the last equalized assessment roll as required by Section 33349 and 33350 of the Health and Safety Code; Exhibit 3 - Certificate of Mailing Notice of the Joint Public Hearing to the governing bodies of each taxing agency within the Project Area as required by Sections 33349 of the Health and Safety Code; and Exhibit 4 - Certificate of Mailing Notice of the Joint Public Hearing to all residents and businesses within the Project Area, as required by Section 33349 of the Health and Safety Code. It was the consensus of both the Agency and the City Council that the Mayor conduct the public hearing and make the necessary statements on behalf of both the City Council and the Agency. Mayor McGeorge stated that the City Council and the Agency are acting under the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California which requires that certain procedures, some of them formal, be followed in the conduct of the joint public hearing. He related that a transcript of the hearing would be made and any persons making statements and giving testimony will be sworn in and subject to questions through the Mayor. He indicated that all individuals wishing to speak will be given an opportunity to do so. Mayor McGeorge asked for a show of hands of those in the audience who wished to speak. No one indicated a desire to speak on the matter. Assistant City Manager Perry suggested that since no one in the audience indicated a desire to speak that the appropriate staff be sworn in at this time in a single oath. Court Reporter Sherrie Benson administered oaths to Assistant City Manager Perry, Associate Planner Morgon and Associate Planner Haddox. Mayor McGeorge outlined the order of procedure as follows: (1) Staff would present the Redevelopment Plan, and evidence and testimony in support of the Redevelopment Plan; (2) Written comments would be received; (3) Receipt of any evidence or oral testimony from those present concerning the Redevelopment Plan; and (4) Following the introduction of all evidence and testimony, the public hearing and joint meeting of the Redding City Council and Redding Redevelopment Agency would be continued to June 18, 1996. He indicated that additional evidence and testimony would be heard and considered and action would be taken relative to the objections of the Redevelopment Plan at the June 18, 1996, meeting, unless written objections on the Redevelopment Plan had been received from property owners or affected taxing entities, in which case, these objections would be considered and acted upon and then act upon the Redevelopment Plan at the Agency and City Council meetings of July 2, 1996. Associate Planner Haddox explained that the purpose of the hearing is to consider evidence and 06/04/96 132 testimony for and against the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan. She stated that evidence will be introduced for consideration by the City Council and the Agency in connection with the following findings and determinations that will be made in the adoption of an ordinance adopting the Redevelopment Plan. She indicated that the required findings and determinations are contained in Section 33367 of the Health and Safety Code and are generally as follows: (1) The Project Area meets the legal qualifications set forth by the Legislature for a blighted area, the redevelopment of which is necessary to effectuate the public purposes described in the Community Redevelopment Law; (2) The Redevelopment Plan would redevelop the Project Area in conformity with the law and in the interests of the public peace, health, safety and welfare; (3) The adoption and carrying out of the Redevelopment Plan is economically sound and feasible; (4) The Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General Plan of the community; (5) The carrying out of the Redevelopment Plan would promote the public peace, health, safety and welfare of the community and would effectuate the purposes and policies of the Community Redevelopment Law; (6) The condemnation of real property, as provided for in the Redevelopment Plan, is necessary to the execution of the Redevelopment Plan, and adequate provisions have been made for payment for properties to be acquired as provided by law; (7) Inclusions of any lands, buildings, or improvements which are not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare is necessary for the effective redevelopment of the whole area of which they are part, and any such area included is necessary for effective redevelopment and is not included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenues from such area without other substantial justification for its inclusion; (8) The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone without the aid and assistance of the Agency; and (9) The effect of tax increment financing will not cause a significant financial burden or detriment on any taxing agency deriving revenues from the Project Area. Ms. Haddox noted that there are other statements and determinations set forth in the proposed ordinance adopting the Redevelopment Plan, but the foregoing are the major evidentiary findings. Mayor McGeorge asked for the receipt of evidence and testimony. Ms. Haddox entered into the record a certification, Exhibit 5, of certain official actions that have been taken by the City Council, Planning Commission, and the Agency in connection with the preparation of the Redevelopment Plan for the SHASTEC Redevelopment Project. Ms. Haddox stated she would like to make some introductory background comments about the Project Area, some of the deficiencies that presently exist in the Project Area, and the benefits hoped to be seen from the redevelopment process as a means to correct these deficiencies. Ms. Haddox explained that in late 1993 the formation of the proposed SHASTEC Redevelopment Project was initiated as a joint effort between the City of Redding, City of Anderson, and Shasta County. In January 1994 the City Council entered into a Cooperation Agreement with these other entities to determine the feasibility of establishing a joint redevelopment project along the Airport Road corridor. The primary purpose of the proposed project was to address and eliminate certain physical and economic conditions in the area that were believed to be preventing the area from utilizing its full development potential. At the same time, the Agency was appointed as the lead agency in this endeavor. She stated that since January 1994 a variety of actions have occurred and have led up to the hearing this evening and is the final public hearing prior to the adoption of the plan. Ms. Haddox stated that as part of the process of determining the feasibility of the project, the entire area was surveyed to identify deficiencies and to formulate potential activities that would address these deficiencies. Many of the identified impediments to full and effective utilization of the area have to do with deficiencies in existing public infrastructure, including streets, drainage, bridges, and traffic control features in the area. She explained that in order for the area to realize its full economic potential, a considerable amount of public improvements will be required. Major activities proposed for the project area include, but are not limited to, the widening and signalization of the Airport Road corridor, the widening of the North Street Bridge, and improvements connected with the Airport Road over crossing of State Highway 44 and Riverside Drive over crossing of Interstate 5. Other projects include street extensions, street resurfacing, drainage improvements, pedestrian safety improvements, economic development activities, and housing activities. She indicated that the list of projects, contained both in the Redevelopment Plan and the Report to the Legislative Bodies, is 06/04/96 133 meant to be illustrative of the types of projects that will be considered, rather than all inclusive. Some projects on the list may not be accomplished by the plan. Many of the projects will require additional funding from other public and private sources in order to be implemented, i.e., the total estimated cost of the proposed public improvement activities is approximately $41 million. It is anticipated that the SHASTEC Project will be able to contribute approximately $14 million, or one-third of the required funding. She related that an additional $5.1 million is anticipated to be available for improving housing opportunities within the territory of the three jurisdictions and another $2.5 million will be utilized for economic development efforts within the project area. It is through a combination of these efforts and activities, as well as through additional private development occurring in the area over the life of the project, that the redevelopment will be accomplished. Ms. Haddox referred to and briefly summarized pertinent parts of the Report of the Agency to the Legislative Bodies, which is the basic supporting documentation for the Redevelopment Plan and the Ordinance which will adopt the Redevelopment Plan. Since this Report has been previously submitted to and reviewed by the Agency and the City Council and has been available for public inspection, she indicated she would only cover certain pertinent parts of the Report in detail. She related that her testimony would also supplement the facts contained in the Report and would be considered as part of the Report. Ms. Haddox indicated that the report on the SHASTEC Redevelopment Project has been prepared pursuant to the provisions of Section 33352 of the Health and Safety Code. Major sections of the report include a description of the reasons for the selection of the project area, a description of the physical and economic conditions that exist in the area that caused the project area to be blighted, a description of specific activities proposed by the Agency, a description of how these projects will improve or alleviate the identified blight conditions, and an explanation of why the elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the project cannot be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone, or by the use of financing alternatives other than tax increment financing. Other sections include a description of the proposed method of financing, the redevelopment of the project area, and an implementation plan which describes the program of action and expenditures proposed to be made during the first five years of the project. Ms. Haddox further stated that some of the primary blighting conditions present in the project area are: (1) structures that exhibit deterioration, dilapidation, defective design and unsafe construction; (2)presence of faulty or inaccurate public utilities; (3) presence of sensitive and nonconforming uses within airport safety and noise zone; (4)the presence of improvements exhibiting substandard design that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of the building or lot; (5) presence of subdivided parcels under multiple ownership of inadequate size for proper utilization; (6) presence of stagnant and declining property values; (7) presence of residential overcrowding; (8) presence of hazard waste; and(9)the lack of necessary commercial facilities that are normally found in neighborhoods. She related that the report proposes a variety of projects that will address the above conditions by: (1) stimulating the development and/or redevelopment of under utilized properties; (2) strengthening the retail, industrial and commercial functions in the project area; (3) the improvement of public infrastructures which will act as a catalyst to further private investment in the area; and (4)improving the housing conditions and opportunities for low and moderate-income residents of the area. She indicated that Section 1, Chapter 4, of the Report discusses the method of financing the redevelopment of the project area. The principal monies utilized by the Agency will be through tax increment funding. Other than tax increment receipts, the potential revenue funding sources for the anticipated project costs include loans, grants, and contributions from the participating jurisdictions, other local entities, State or Federal government, or from project area developers, proceeds from the sale or lease of property, repayment of agency loans and advances, financing proceeds based upon revenues from special assessment or special tax districts and developer fees. She explained that neither the participating jurisdictions, other public entities, nor private sector developers will be able to fully assume the combination of costs associated with new development, site assembly, rehabilitation, or the costs of infrastructure improvements anticipated and needed in the project area apart from the participation of the Agency. The provision for tax increments in the redevelopment plan is necessary to cover the currently estimated shortfall between costs and these funding sources and to be available in the event that other funding sources are not fully utilized. Ms. Haddox concluded that the report details the efforts made during the project formation to consult with both the general public and all affected taxing entities within the project area. Over the past year, several public meetings have been held at various locations throughout the project area. Project 06/04/96 134 information notices have been mailed to both the assessees of record within the project, and business owners and residences within the project and numerous consultations have been held with the 17 taxing entities potentially affected by the establishment of the project. She noted that, to date, no protests have been filed in opposition to the project area. The Redevelopment Plan provides for statutorily required tax retainments to each of the taxing entities through the affected life of the project. Mayor McGeorge asked that the Report to the Agency, Exhibit 6, along with the testimony, be made part of the record. Associate Planner Morgon related that he would refer to and briefly summarize the Final EIR on the Redevelopment Plan. He noted that this was also part of the Report of the Agency to the Legislative Bodies on the Redevelopment Plan. He indicated that the Agency was the "lead agency" in the preparation of the EIR. On March 12, 1996, the City of Redding Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Draft EIR prepared for the SHASTEC Project. He stated that all comments received through the close of all three public hearings have been incorporated into the Final EIR. Mr. Morgon stated that the Agency received general comments of an informational nature and not raising substantive environmental issues from the United States Army Corp. of Engineers. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Shasta County Fire Department, Shasta County Regional Transportation Planning Agency, City of Anderson Department of Planning and Community Development, and the City of Redding Electric Utility. The Agency also received comments that did raise substantive environmental issues from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, the Shasta County Department of Public Works, and the Shasta County Office of Education. He indicated that based on comments received from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, the following actions were taken: a mitigation measure was revised to reflect that the services within wetland areas or riparian corridors are also subject to permitting by the Regional Water Quality Control Board; a mitigation measure was also added to reflect those construction disturbances greater than five acres shall be subject to a national pollution discharge elimination system storm water permit for construction activities by the State Water Resources Control Board and any local grading ordinances. In addition, he stated a mitigation measure was added to reflect that construction disturbances within water courses shall be subject to waste discharge requirements or water quality certification by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Based on comments received from the Shasta County Department of Public Works, a mitigation measure was revised to reflect that Shasta County shall continue to require developers to dedicate the roadway right-of-way and form a permanent road division for maintenance of roads that are not part of the County maintained system. The Shasta County Office of Education requested that language be added reflecting that development will have a significant impact on schools in the area and that developer fees and tax increment pass- through funds will not be sufficient to mitigate these impacts to less than significant levels. In response, he related that the Final EIR concludes that the actual extent of the impact is difficult to determine since much of the vacant residential land in the area lacks the necessary utilities, primarily sewer and water, to facilitate large scale residential subdivision development. Construction of homes will probably occur on an incremental basis over a long period of time as individual properties develop and utility lines are extended to adjoining properties. He noted that under AB1290, the Agency is not required to consider the fiscal impacts of a redevelopment plan on taxing entities, such as schools. The Final EIR was also revised to reflect the current year's enrollment figures, including child yield factors, prepared by Jack Schroeder and Associates. He indicated that these were the only written comments received on the draft EIR during the 45-day review period and through the course of the public hearings before the Planning Commissions of the City of Redding, City of Anderson, and Shasta County. Members of the City Council and the Agency had no questions concerning the Final EIR. Mayor McGeorge entered the Final Environmental Impact Report, as submitted, Exhibit 7, into the record as part of the Report of the Agency. Ms. Haddox briefly summarized the Redevelopment Plan. She indicated that the Redevelopment Plan provides certain authority to the Agency and to the participating jurisdictions to implement and further a program of redevelopment, rehabilitation, and revitalization of the land area within the boundaries of the project. While the redevelopment plan contains specific goals and objectives of the Agency as it pertains to the redevelopment of the project area, it does not require that these be 06/04/96 135 undertaken or accomplished in any specific manner. She explained that it does provide certain financing tools, including the ability to receive tax increments to accomplish these objectives. It also authorizes other financing tools, such as loans from the participating jurisdictions and provides for certain bonding authority. It gives property owners and tenants within the project area rights which are guaranteed by law. It authorizes the Agency to acquire and dispose of real property and authorizes the use of eminent domain, if necessary, under certain circumstances. The Redevelopment Plan also guarantees relocation assistance and payments required by law. Finally, the Plan sets forth the time limits imposed on the project by law. Generally, these are 12 years for the use of an eminent domain, 20 years for the establishment of debt, 30 years for the accomplishment of activity, and 45 years for the repayment debt. Members of the City Council and the Agency had no questions concerning the proposed Redevelopment Plan. Mayor McGeorge entered the proposed Redevelopment Plan, Exhibit 8, into the record. Ms. Haddox advised that no written comments had been received on today's proceeding. Mayor McGeorge determined that there was no one present wishing to speak on this matter. MOTION: Made by Agency Member Murray, seconded by Agency Member R. Anderson, to continue the joint public hearing regarding the SHASTEC Redevelopment Area Project to June 18, 1996. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes MOTION: Made by Council Member R. Anderson, seconded by Council Member Murray, to continue the joint public hearing regarding the SHASTEC Redevelopment Area Project to June 18, 1996. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes MOTION: Made by Agency Member R. Anderson, seconded by Agency Member P. Anderson, to adjourn the special meeting of the Redding Redevelopment Agency. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes At the hour of 7:33, Chair Kehoe adjourned the special meeting of the Redding Redevelopment Agency. APPOINTMENTS AND REAPPOINTMENTS (B-080-450 & B-080-010 & B-080-350) MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member R. Anderson, to appoint Vera Wooden and Janice Ervin and reappoint Beverly Romero and Mary Martz to the Senior Citizens Facility Advisory Commission for two-year terms expiring May 1, 1998, appoint Stephen Thomas to the Airports Commission to serve a four-year term expiring May 1, 2000; and appoint Bill Cox to the Recreation and Parks Commission to serve a four-year term expiring May 1, 2000. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes FUNDING REQUEST - re Downtown Festival in Library Park (B-130-030 & R-030-145) City Manager Warren highlighted the Report to City Council dated May 28, 1996, incorporated herein by reference, concerning a request for $2,000 from Shawn Tillman on behalf of a group seeking to form a nonprofit corporation to start up a Downtown Festival in Library Park. Mr. Warren related that this idea is an outgrowth of the Downtown Plan. The requested funding would be used to form a nonprofit corporation and to purchase insurance for the event. He stated that it appears that the Shasta Housing Development Corporation will agree to be the sponsor for the event the first year. He indicated that it is stars understanding that this is a one-time request, as the event will either be self-funding, funded by a business improvement district, or be supported by a service club after the first year. Mr. Warren explained that, based on his experience with successful downtowns, there are at least five necessary elements: (1) merchants and citizens are involved; (2) it is well planned; (3) events are regularly scheduled; (4)provides a variety of activities and products for all citizens; and (5) provides a nice atmosphere. He believed three criteria could be utilized to measure the success of this event: (1) number of people attending the events and whether attendance is increasing or decreasing; (2) 06/04/96 136 number of vendors; and (3) sales occurring around the area, i.e., restaurants, etc. It is the recommendation of staff that the request be approved utilizing funds in the Special Projects budget. Council Member Kehoe suggested that a fourth measurement of the event's success could be the nonprofit organization's agreement to fund public improvements and other elements of the Downtown Plan. In response to Council Member Kehoe, City Attorney Wingate advised that a retained security officer would have to defer to the Police Department for any arrests. Jeff Swanson, 4160 Cheryl Drive, explained that the corporation's estimated budget for the first year is approximately$20,000. Of that amount, it is believed $5,000 is needed to begin operations. Once the festivals begin, the event should be self-generating and self-perpetuating from revenues collected through vendor fees and beverage sales. In addition, local service and business organizations will be approached for additional startup monies. He emphasized that all of the net proceeds generated from the event will be used to fund community projects within the downtown area. MOTION: Made by Council Member Murray, seconded by Council Member P. Anderson, to approve the request to provide $2,000 in funding to form a nonprofit corporation to start up a Downtown Festival utilizing funds in the Special Projects budget. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT - re Acquisition of Property on Cypress Avenue (C-070-010 & C-050-025) Mayor McGeorge abstained from discussion and voting on this matter. Assistant City Manager Perry's Report to City Council dated May 22, 1996, incorporated herein by reference, recalled that on April 1, 1996, the Redding Redevelopment Agency directed staff to finalize an agreement with Caltrans to revert the property on Cypress Avenue to City ownership. The agreement is a three-party agreement between Caltrans, the City and the Agency. It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement on behalf of the City and accept title to the property. MOTION: Made by Council Member R. Anderson, seconded by Council Member Murray, to authorize the Mayor to sign the Cooperative Agreement for the acquisition of property on Cypress Avenue on behalf of the City and accept title to said property. Voting was as follows: Ayes: Council Members - R. Anderson, Kehoe, Murray and P. Anderson Noes: Council Members - None Absent: Council Members -None Abstain: Council Members - McGeorge ORDINANCE - Amendment re Time Limitations on Original (Midtown) Redevelopment Project Area (R-030-150) Assistant City Manager Perry recalled that Assembly Bill 1290 required that every redevelopment plan adopted on or before December 31, 1993, comply with certain time limitations on the incurring and repaying of debt and the effectiveness of redevelopment plans. Accordingly, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2103 on December 20, 1994. He stated that a recent interpretation of Community Redevelopment Law indicates that the time limitations set for the Midtown Redevelopment Project are incorrect. It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council offer the necessary ordinance for first reading, thereby, amending the time for incurring debt, the effectiveness of the Plan, and for receiving tax increment to repay debt, and waive the full reading of said ordinance. Council Member Kehoe offered Ordinance No. 2150 for first reading, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Redding, California, amending Ordinance No. 2103 establishing and amending certain limitations with respect to the amended Redevelopment Plan for the Market Street 06/04/96 137 Redevelopment Project Area. MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member P. Anderson, that the full reading of Ordinance No. 2150 be waived and the City Attorney be instructed to read the full title. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT -Electric Utility (B-130-070) Finance Officer Strong provided an overview of the Report to City Council dated May 21, 1996, incorporated herein by reference, regarding the Electric Utility's Monthly Financial Report for April 1996. It is the recommendation of staff that the report be accepted as presented. In response to Council Member R. Anderson, Electric Utility Director Lindley related that the City's MSR budget was actually less than what was anticipated during budget preparation, thereby resulting in the difference between the amount budgeted and expended in the Other Operating Expenses category. MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member R. Anderson, to accept the Electric Utility's Monthly Financial Report for April 1996 as presented. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT - General Fund (B-130-070) Finance Officer Strong highlighted the Report to City Council dated May 28, 1996, incorporated herein by reference, concerning the General Funds Monthly Financial Report for April 1996. Total revenue to date($24.2 million)is slightly higher($50,702 or.2 percent)than staff's original cash flow estimate. Expenditures to date (excluding encumbrances) total $27,406,285 or $1,634,869 (5.7 percent) below staffs original cash flow projection. It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council accept the Monthly Financial Report for April 1996. In response to Council Member Murray, Administrative Services Director Starman stated that staff is projecting to end the fiscal year with approximately$5.1 million (15 percent) in reserves. He noted that this is a relative conservative figure given the fact that expenditures are trending below projections. City Manager Warren related that the Ten-Year Financial Plan as of May 1, 1996, shows a reserve of 14.6 percent. He further noted that there are plans to draw down that reserve for the next four years bringing it to a low of 6 percent. MOTION: Made by Council Member Kehoe, seconded by Council Member R. Anderson, to accept the General Fund's Monthly Financial Report for April 1996. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - Tentative Subdivision Map S-27-90, Quartz Ridge Heights (S-100-608) The Report to City Council dated May 22, 1996, from the Development Services Department addressed the intent of the conditions of approval for Tentative Subdivision Map S-27-90, Quartz Ridge Heights Subdivision. In addition, City Manager Warren's memorandum to the City Council dated May 31, 1996, incorporated herein by reference, summarized three important areas concerning Mr. Willis' proposed project on Quartz Hill Road: cost, fairness, and options. The report addressed the questions raised by Mr. Willis at a previous City Council meeting and concluded that the City's Code and policies are clear as to the issues raised by Mr. Willis. It related that the conditions were based on the property as it exists and a subdivision to create 128 lots in an unimproved area. The report further indicated that the City's policies were in place before the property was purchased and subdivided. The only question is the extra grading required to remove the "hump" in Quartz Hill Road. This requires the removal of more dirt than would normally be expected, but is essential to improvements of the arterial. In addition, similar requirements to flatten 06/04/96 138 roads have been placed on other subdivisions in the City. The report also advises that questions pertaining to both policy and a specific tentative map should be addressed through an amendment request to the Planning Commission with the right to appeal. Fred Willis viewed the issues as follows: staff through its interpretations, intent and omission has over conditioned the property. He opined that the facts plainly show that the developer is being requested by the City to contribute fees well beyond the property's prorata share. He related that it is not his fault the benefit district does not have the necessary funds or fees to make the necessary improvements. He stressed that the City's claim of financial constraints does not give it the right to impose its financial burden on others. Through its actions, he contended that the City has rendered his property useless, therefore, valueless. He explained that he believes three things have changed since his map was approved in 1990: (1) Staff's intent and interpretation of the conditions; (2) The definition of on-site and off-site improvements; and (3) Proportionality issue. The Circulation Element of the General Plan states that a developer is responsible for his prorata share of the improvements. He cited a recent Supreme Court decision which addressed the proportionality issue. Principal Planner Keaney recalled that in the spring of 1991 Mr. Willis, in conjunction with the property owner to the south, requested an amendment to his subdivision map. He explained that the amendment did not have to much to do directly with the requirements for the construction of Quartz Hill Road, however, it was nine months after the property was originally approved and considerable work had been done on the issue of Quartz Hill Road. At that time, there was discussion regarding the design of the road. He indicated there is a fairly sharp grade coming up from Lake Redding Estates to the plateau of Quartz Hill Road and that Mr. Willis' property line roughly coincides with this break. He explained that in order to construct a new arterial, it is necessary to put in a much smoother, longer transition curve in the hill and it was concluded that considerable off-site construction would be necessary. Mr. Keaney explained that at the time the amendment was requested, staff asked that the conditions be changed to more clearly define the requirements for the off-site design and the applicable credit being given for their construction. In accordance with the subdivision conditions, Mr. Willis was reimbursed from the fees for the design work which was done. In response to Council Member R. Anderson, City Attorney Wingate stated that the Supreme Court case originating from the State of Oregon would not apply as the subdivision map has already been approved. Given the fact that Mr. Willis presented his questions in an open public session, Council Member Kehoe requested that staffs responses to these questions be made public. Accordingly, Council Member Murray provided a brief overview of staff's responses to Mr. Willis' questions. He stated he personally agreed with staff's interpretation of the conditions and the consistency of the position taken with regard to Item Nos. 1, 2 and 5. With regard to Item No. 4, he opined that Mr. Willis should, in fact, be given credit against the benefit fee for removing the "hump" in the road. He related that the City already owns the road and, therefore, owns the "hump." In response to Council Member R. Anderson, City Attorney Wingate related that if Council Member Murray's proposal adjusted the expenses in a fashion that would be more equitable to Mr. Willis, it would be considered an amendment to the subdivision map. He explained that if the City Council is interested in having the matter reviewed by the Planning Commission, it would be appropriate for the City Council to refer the matter to the Commission for review and recommendation. He related that such a referral would, however, be based on an amendment request by Mr. Willis. In response to Council Member Murray, Mr. Wingate stated that credit cannot be granted for the removal of this "hump" unless the City Council is prepared to direct the Public Works Department to initiate a new project. Council Member Murray did not want the City to create an environment which fosters "leap frog" development due to requiring extraordinary amounts of off-site work. He requested that staff review this policy further. In response to Council Member P. Anderson, Mr. Wingate related that any action the City Council takes would not affect Mr. Willis' ability to request an amendment to his subdivision map. 06/04/96 139 Mr. Willis stated that Condition No. 8 states that funds shall be used for the reconstruction of Quartz Hill Road. He indicated that staff has admitted on two separate occasions that the subdivision map was over conditioned, as well as the fact that a two-lane road is now acceptable. He noted that the "hump" is 650 feet long and 15 feet deep in some areas. He related that his subdivision alone would not even begin to trigger the need to rebuild Quartz Hill Road. He stressed the need for the City Council to read the conditions carefully. Mr. Wingate reiterated that the City Council does not have the authority to make a ruling unless an amendment to the subdivision map is requested. MOTION: Made by Council Member P. Anderson, seconded by Council Member Kehoe, to accept the following recommendations relative to Quartz Ridge Heights: (1) provide a partial reimbursement for improvements south of the southern boundary of the subdivision as stipulated in the current conditions of approval; (2) advise Mr. Willis he is subject to the Citywide Traffic Impact Fee; (3) follow City code with regard to the improvements on Quartz Hill Road. These improvements are needed for the subdivision to occur; and(4) advise Mr. Willis that the effect of ownership on off-site and on-site improvements has no bearing and advise Mr. Willis that he can request an amendment to his Tentative Subdivision Map. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes SELECTION OF CONSULTANT FOR DESIGN OF TURTLE BAY PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE (4'-95 6-46O-700)- 5- -o 5c—Soo Senior Planner Hanson summarized the Report to City Council dated May 28, 1996, incorporated herein by reference, concerning the selection of a firm to design the Turtle Bay Pedestrian Bridge and the acceptance of the McConnell Foundation's offer to fund the cost of the design process if the internationally renown design firm of Calatrava Valls is selected. It was noted that this would require the City Council to waive the Request for Proposals process as outlined in City Council Policy No. 1501. It is the recommendation of staff that the City Council approve the Foundation's request to select the firm of Calatrava Valls to design the Turtle Bay Pedestrian Bridge subject to: (1) the City Council approving the final contract terms with Calatrava Valls; (2) the involvement of a local engineering firm; and (3) accepting the McConnell Foundation's request to fund the design costs. Mayor McGeorge related that he had requested that this item be placed on the Regular Calendar to show the community the McConnell Foundation's generosity. City Manager Warren recalled that in 1994 the City sold the Benton Ranch property and received a net amount of$1,580,000. At that time, it was anticipated that these monies would be used to construct the bridge. To date, this money combined with grant monies equals $2,092,000. The difference between the estimated cost to construct the bridge ($4 million) and the total monies available will come from the McConnell Foundation. He noted that this project truly represents a public/private partnership. In addition, he noted that the City can encourage, but not require, the utilization of a local engineering firm, therefore, the term "local" needs to be removed from the recommendation. Council Member Kehoe voiced his support of maintaining the competitive bid process. In this particular case, he believed staff's recommendation was appropriate for the following reasons: (1) the costs of this contract are being paid exclusively by the McConnell Foundation; and (2) there appears to be some type of stipulation, whereby the McConnell Foundation will fund the project if its design team is selected. MOTION: Made by Council Member Murray, seconded by Council Member R. Anderson, to waive the Request for Proposal (RFP) process outlined in City Council Policy 1501 relating to the selection of technical consultants; approve the McConnell Foundation's request and offer to fund the design of the pedestrian bridge at Turtle Bay utilizing Calatrava Valls as the design consultant subject to the following: (1)City staff negotiating a contract with Calatrava Valls; (2) City Council approving the final contract terms with Calatrava Valls; and (3) involvement of an engineering firm; and directed staff to prepare a funding contract with the McConnell Foundation and authorized the Mayor to sign said contract subsequent to the City Attorney's approval. The Vote: Unanimous Ayes 06/04/96 140 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, at the hour of 8:32 p.m., Mayor McGeorge declared the meeting adjourned. APPROVED: Ne-C7:('1/'" ATTEST: City Clerk / 06/04/96