HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso. 1990-516 - Adopting findings in response to written objections on Adoption of the Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for Canby-Hilltop-Cypress Redevelopment Project . � . .
RESOLUTZON N0.�7O ��(�
A RESOLUTION OF THE CZTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDDING ADOPTING FZND�iGS
IN RESPONSE TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS ON ADOPTION OF THE AhLNDMENT TO 'i'?;E
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE CA�`]BY-HILLTOP-CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT PROTcC'..
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Community Redevelopment �aw
(Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et. s�e . ) , the Redding Redevelo��nt
Agency (the "Agency") prepared and submitted to the City Council of the �ity
of Redding (the "City Council") a proposed Amendment to the Redevelopment ?1an
(the "Amendment") for the Canby-Hilltop-Cypress Redevelopment Project (the
"Project" ) ; and
wHcREAS, the City Council and the Agency held a joint public hearir.g on
October 2, 1990, on adoption of the Amendment to the Plan and on certification
of the Fina1 Environmental Impact Report (the "FIR") on the Amendment to the
Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has nrovided an opportunity for a11 persoas to
be heard and 'nas received ann considered all written comnents received and a11
evidence and testimony presented for or against any and a11 aspects of t�e
Amendment; and
WHERE.�'�S, Sec�ion 33363 of the Aealth ar.d Safety Code provides that be_cre
adoptir,g the redevelopmenc p1an, t:�e leaisiative bocy sha11 make �r_::en
fir.dings in response to each wricten objection of an af�ected prooerty o.:r.er
or ta:cinc entit, and stia11 responc in writina to t�e written objec�'_c-s
received be[ore or ac the noiiced oublic hearing;
,ypp;, m}:cgcpCBE, THE CITY COfJNCIL OF TRE CIT`f Or REDDING DOES -c3c�C
RESOLVE ,'v5 FOLiO'��5: �
S
Section 1 . The Cicy Council nas consicered all evider.ce aad tes�i*:or.�: o^ C
1
the acoption of che Amenc-ent and 'nas responded in writina co the •.+r_��en �'
�
objec�ions received be_ore or ac t`�e noticed public hear��ng. �
� �
Section 2. The City Council hereby adopts the writte❑ findings i�
response to each written objection of affected property owners and ta:cinc
entities attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
I HEBEBY CERTZFY that the foregoing resolution was introduced and reac� ai
a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Redding on the 1Fith da�
of OCtober , 1990, and was duly adopted at said meeting by the followinc
vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBEtts: Arness , Dahl , Fulton, Moss & Buffum
NOES: COUNCZL MEMBERS: NOne
ABSENT: COUNCZL MEt9BERS: NOne
ABSTAZN: COUNCIL MEMSERS: ��Dne
. //- ..,,,.�.�/„< ;
NANCY BU _(!M, F1�,yor
Citl of•�Redding
ATTEST: v
S�L�•�ZG4!'.r.f'�CQ
ETHEL A. NICHOLS, City Clerk
FORM APPROVED:
RAN AiL A. HFiYS, ity f ttorney
- Z -
.. . . .
EXHIBIT "A"
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS
CANBY-HILLTOP-CYPRESS REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Written Protest No. 1:
Nancy Schm.itz, Executive Secretary for Western Care Construction Company,
writes to determine the effect of the Project on their. property located at
3062 Churn Creek Road.
Response No. 1:
Agency staff contacted Ms. Schmitz by phone on September 10, 1990 and advised
her that the property was within the boundaries of the original Canby-Hilltop-
Cypress Project Area and that no new redevelopment projects were planned
iimnediately adjacent to the property. She was advised of the proposed
projects in the Southern Addition, which would benefit the property. Her
concerns about increased taxes were also discussed. Since the Redevelopment
Agency has no taxing authority, there wi11 be no increase .in taxes as a result
of the Redevelopment Project.
Written Protest No. 2:
Eugene Karandy writes to object to the Amendment. He owns property at 911
Jamieson Court, which is inside the original Canby-Hilltop-Cypress Project
Area boundaries. Mr. Karandy feels that the cost of the proposed projects
should be born by developers and not by area homeowners through added taxes.
Response No. 2:
Tax .increment financing will be the primary source of funding for the proposed
projects. Under this financing method, the amount of property taxes generated
by the project area at the beginning of the project is called the Base Year
Value. As property within a project is developed, property values cise,
causing an increase in tax revenues. The difference between the base year
taxes and the increased taaces caused by higher property values is used to fund
the various improvements within the designated project area. A redevelopment
project is not an additional ta�c; instead, it uses the natural increase in
property ta�ces above the base year levels as a product of land sales, infla-
tionary adjustments, new subdivision activity, new construction or remodeling.
Written Protest No. 3:
Ms. Kathy Andreola has submitted a letter on behalf of the Redding Elementary
School District, Shasta Union High School District, Shasta County Office of
Education and the Shasta-Tehama-Trinity Joint Community College District
objecting to the adoption of the Amendment to the Canby-Hilltop-Cypress
Redevelopment Plan. She points out that the Redding Elementary School
District expects 178 new students to be generated from development of the
Northern Addition. This represents the equivalent of 8 - 10 new classrooms or
one-half of an elementary school (approximately $2,000,000, excluding site
acquisition) . The Shasta Union High School District expects 180 new students
� : .
to be generated by development in the Added Areas. Housing these students
will cost the District at least $2,700,000 for permanent facilities, excluding
site acquisition. Ms. Andreola points out that the State has not funded the
construction of new schools and that Districts must make special application
to the State for bond funds. The bond funds approved by the voters in June
have already been depleted, which means Districts are left to local measures
to resolve school overcrowding. She further notes that the Districts will be
contributing $58,000,000 in 1990 dollars to the Project. Assuming the other
aff.ected taxing entities receive nearly all their property tax increment,
two-thirds of the redevelopment financing of the Project will be raised
through District property tax increment.
Response No. 3:
The elementary and high school districts receive development fees from the new
housing generated in the Project Area and losses in operating revenue due to
the Redevelopment Project will be made up by the State.
The Agency has determined that the project will cause an increase in services
demanded of the Redding Elementary School District and the Shasta Union High
School District. As a result, the Agency included in the Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan a provision for school facilities on the project list
(Exhibit 4) , as foll.ows:
N. School Improvements and Facilities which benefit the Project Area and
which are required to remedy financial detriment caused by the Project.
In addition, in order to assist school construction, the Agency has offered to
provide 100� of the 2� pass-through, which would otherwise have been received
by the school districts.
TEAB:RESPONSE.CHC