Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 7, 1993.'~ _ ~ .~7 Pre-meating 6:30 p.m. - Cable Acceas A G E N D A ~ ARCADIA CITY COIINCIL M88TING DEC~BR 7, 1993 7:30 P.M. ACTION INVOCATION PLSDC3E OF ALLBGIANCB ROLL CALL: Council Members Fasching, Harbicht, Lojeski, Margett and Ciraulo. MINDT83 of the November 16, 1993 adjourned and regular meetings. MOTION: Read all ordinances.and resolutions by title only and waive reading in full. Praseatatioa to Smil Amato. Preaeatatioa of Proclamatioa to Paaa Baltz Proclamatioa - Arbor Day All Present Approved 5-0 Adopted Special Preaeatatioas (business providing aid during Altadena fire) 1. SOARDS AND 'CO~SISSIONS a. Recommendation from the Recreation Commission to provide financial assistance to local youth baseball leaguea. . b. Recommendation from the Senior Citizen's Commission for authorization to submit a proposal for a congregate meals program at the Arcadia Community Center. 2. Time reserved for those in the audience who wish to address the City Council (five-minute time limit per person). A~~roved 5-0 Continued to 12/21 @ 6:OO~.m. Ms. Cruz-Madrid ~ ~ , ~~ . ACTION . 3. . RSCSSS.CIT7t COIINCIL 4.. MEETING OF TH8 ARCADIA REDSVELOPMENT AGENCY' ° a. ROLL CALL: Agency Members Fasching, Harbicht, Margett and Ciraulo " Zojeski; All Present : ~" b. ., Request to approve Professional Services . Agreement to prepare an Erivironmental Impact Report for the Downtown Revitalization Streetscape Project. A~Droved 5-0 ~ c. Recommendation :to approve the Redevelopment Agency's annual report to the State. Approved 5-0 d: ADJOURN to.6:00 p.m., December 21, 1993 ~ ` _ 5. RECONVSNB CITY COIINCIL,. ~ 6. M1ITTERS FROffi ELECTSD OFFICIALS' ~ 7., CONSBNT ITEMS a. Recommendation for approvaI of°Final Map for " ari 8-unit residential condominium at 121-125. Genoa Street. ~ A~nroved 5-0 b.- Recommendation for approval of plans and: specifications and authorization to call for bids . for,conversion of street lights from series to - multiple circuit"s on Valencia way/Hillcrest Slvd. (Job No. 533) and Huntington.Drive from Second ~ Avenue to Fifth Avenue'(Job No. 583). Apnroved 5-0 , c. Request to approve purchase of a Jukebox ~ Subsystem for Police Department`records ' imaging ~iPnroved 5-~ . d. ' Recommendation for final acceptance - W.O. 691 - ' 12" waterline replacement, fire hydrants and - service laterals in Baldwin Avenue from.Live Oak Avenue~to Palm Drive. _ Ap~roved 5-0 _ 2 _ AGENDA 12/7/93 , ; i ~ ~ . , ,- , ' ACTION %, coatiaued- e. , Recommendation to approve the Redevelopment `. - Agency's annual report to.the State. Annroved 5-0 f: Request to consider County of Los Angeles Home. Improveinent Loan Program. A~~roved 5-0 8. CIT7t MANAGBR Accepted Plan as a. Presentation of:City'Public Information Plan. outlined. 5-0 b. Recommendation Eo approve specifications and ' authorize staff to advertise for contract street sweeping bids as part of an overall" efficiency program. Denied 5-0 9: CITY ATPORNBY ' a. ORDINANCE N0, T999 - INTRODUCTION - Amending' :' certain sections of Division 1 and 2 of Part 2, Chapter 2, Article III regarding prima'.facie , . speed limits., - introduced 5-0 ' . b. RSSOLUTION N0. 5757' Authorizing the City Manager to file with.the Department of Transportation; . ' United States of America, for a.grant application ' for operating and capitaT assistance funds under 1964 as amended. the Federal Transit Act of Adopted 5-0 , c., R&SOLUTION N0.•5758 Calling and giving notice of : General Municipal Election to be the holding of a , held in said city on Tuesday, April 12; 1994, for . '. ~ officers of said City:as the election of certain , required by the:provisions of the City 6harter. Adobted 5-0' d. '. RESOLUTION N0:~5759 Requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles.to ` permit the"Registrar-Recorder of said County to . -. render specified services to the City relating to the conduct of a General Municipal Election , - be held in said City on April 12, 1994. to Adopted 5-0 , - 3 - AGENDA 12/7/93 ,t . ~ • ACTION coatiaued e. RESOLUTION N0. 5760 Adopting regulations for candidates for elective office, pertaining to materials submitted to the electorate and the costs thereof for the General Municipal Election to be held in said City on Tuesday, April 12, 1994. Adopted 5-0 . f. RESOLUTION N0. 5761 Ordering the canvass of ` the General Municipal Election,to be held on April 12, 1994 to be made by the City Clerk of of the City of Arcadia. ~ Ado~ted 5-0 g. Consideration of conceptual ordinance amendment , to effect building sites with.delayed construction. ApDroved 5-0 h. Claim of L.A. Francis Denied 5-0 i. . Claim of D. Jones Denied 5-0 10. blATTSRS FROffi STAFF 11. ADJOIIRN to 6:00 p.m., December 21,. 1993, in memozy of Susie Pignato.. Rowe - Invite Nell Soto to 12/21 meeting to address Council on AQMD election. Lopez - Letter to CalTrana re: car pool lanes Dale - Report re: business license fees Miller - Report re: City Council salaries - 4 - ~ AGENDA 12/7/93 Y-36 -3 ,„ wfA 9"b 7, Memorandum.tip ,4t.. okpoRAT.., DATE: December ,, 1993 TO:. Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: David Feinberg, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: Authorization for Federal Grant Application Staff is currently in the, process of preparing a federal grant application for the purchase of eight replacement Arcadia Dial- A-Ride vehicles. . Part of the grant application process requires a resolution by the City Council assuring that the City is in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, will utilize minority business enterprises to the fullest extent possible as part of the grant, :, and authorizing the City Manager to file the application. Recommendation . It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution No. 5757, authorizing the City Manager to, file a grant application with the Department of ' Transportation, Federal. Transit AdministratiO. • Approved: . Donald R. Duckwort , City Manager LASES � � '' I 1 US7 a SO 4y i /, „' Wpb ' , ad,,,,- hs 5 //es 7, 4.,,,,, _ Memorandum i ,,,A,,„ _ARCD = qi iitir !~c\ATE/o9 Date: December 1, 1993 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: MICHAEL H. MILLER, CITY ATTORNEY H /77 SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS TO EFFECT BUILDING SITES WITH DELAYED CONSTRUCTION The City Council requested an update on the above subject which has been placed on the agenda per request of the City Manager. The Community Development Department administers Property Maintenance and Building Code requirements. The Director, Mr. Kelly, has reviewed this memorandum. The basic problem relates to_ the appearance of properties in an uncompleted state of constru tion e.g. debris, property lacking landscaping and related maters. This problem has been compounded by increased delays (probably caused by economics) in completion of development causing 1nger periods of time for .the properties appearance to be a problem It . should be noted that in staffs ' opinion there are not a arge number of these problem sites; however, the problem still ex'sts. The attached April 1993 report from Ms. Butler explains the City's approach. Also, see the attached correspondence between the City and the Rancho Santa Anita Association. CURRENT NUISANCE ABATEMENT APPROACH Active utilization of the City's Property Maintenance Nuisance Abatement Code should mitigate the problem in terms of appearance. In extreme situations where there is little or no cooperation) the City can, after a hearing and court order, . enter the prop rty, perform the cleanup work or complete certain work, and bill the owner. If not paid it becomes a lien and is paid through heir property taxes. Existing provisions of the Municipal Code are in place to implement this approach. There are certain operational issues as outlined in Ms. Butler's memo which will need tb be finalized. CODE AMENDMENTS To supplement the property maintenance approach, the following is legally feasible: Amend the Municipal Code to require (1) conditions to building permit, renewals and extensions predicated on cleanup and improvement of the site and/or a financial deposit (bond, letter of credit) or other commitment to the City to assure property maintenance. In other words, impose a conditional building permit (2) not grant the building permit or extension until the property is brought up to an acceptable standard. LASER I AGED With the appropriate Code amendments including necessary "findings" to justify the above, I believe a sustainable ordinance is leglly feasible. It would be based, in part, on Arcadia's strong inte est in aesthetics, regulating public nuisance conditions and maintenance of neighborhood property values. It is anticipated that application of these Code amendments will be on a case by case basis, depending on various factors with regard to the particular property. It adds a tool to the arsenal of property maintenance methods. There is no panacea to the problems addressed in this memo. Achieving an ideal property ite has many practical problems, particularly when there is a lac of landscaping. COUNCIL DIRECTION If Council is interested in a Code amendment as discussed ab ve, direction to prepare the proposed ordinance is necessary. The. existing property maintenance approach including the lien process can occur now without Code amendments. c: Donald R. Duckworth, City Manager Bill Kelly, Asst. City Manager/Community Development Donna Butler, Asst. Comm. Dev. Dir./Planning Roy Streeter, Asst. Comm. Dev. Dir./Building • April 6, 1993 TO: ARCADIA CITY COUNCIL FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT DONNA L. BUTLER, ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL'S INQUIRY REGARDING MAINTENANCE OF CONSTRUCTION SITES This memo is in response to the City Council's inquiry concerning maintenance of construction sites. The Council has expressed concern regarding the length of time taken to complete some jobs and the maintenance of job sites. In May, 1992, the Planning Department presented a report to the City Council regarding this issue. At that time the Building Division contacted nine cities (Pasadena, West Covina, San Marino, Whittier, Monrovia, Pico Rivera, Upland, Claremont and Beverly Hills) regarding the following: • Do the cities have a maximum length of time that someone has to complete a home. All of the cities, like Arcadia, use the time limits set forth (as follows) in the Uniform Building Code. • Building permits are good for 180 days from the date of issuance to the first inspection. • • The permit is active as along as there are inspections and progres is being made. • . Inspections shall be for legitimate requests and must be recorded in the building file. There must be some evidence of work being done. • A building permit may be extended by the Building Official for a eriod not exeeding 180 days on written request by the permittee showing that circumstances beyond the control of the permittee have prevented action from being taken. • No permit shall be extended more than once. None of the cities have a maximum time limit for completion. i/6/93 age 1 • ' • Do any of the cities surveyed require completion bonds, if so, how much and does the completion bond accomplish anything? - None of the cities require a completion bond for construction of buildin s although some cities require completion bonds for work within the public right of way (i.e., sidewalk/street work). Some of the problems with completion bonds are: (1) who would complete the construction if work or : project ceases; (2) who is going to be responsible to ensure completion, the city or the property owner, etc.; and, (3) who will be liable if the City does the work or hires someone to do the work? These are just a few of the problems associated with completion bonds. • Do the cities have any specific requirements regarding maintenance of property while under construction? Two cites, Beverly Hills and Whittier have the following requirements. • Beverly Hills has a maintenance ordinance requiring that the site to be kept in a heat and orderly manner but noted it is difficult to enforce. • Whittier requires that the property be fenced with chain link to prevent accidents. The remaining seven cities have no requirements; however four of the cities note that the building inspectors handle clean-up complaints. Arcadia's building inspectors and code enforcement officers try to ensure continued maintenance of construction sites. • What action is taken to clean up sites if permits have expired and have not been renewed and what time frame do they have? Four cities rely on Code Enforcement to have the properties cleaned up. One city, Beverly Hills, cleans the property and bills the homeowner or takes legal action on a complaint basis. Arcadia usually relies on the City's code enforcement officers to have the • properties cleaned up. In addition, the City has filed Nuisance Abateme is against property and had private companies clean up the property at the property owner's expense. 4/6/93 l'age 2 . • ANALYSIS In regards to maintenance of the property, currently the building inspectors are advising developers/contractors that no inspections will be done until the site has been cleaned up (this does not include removal of scrap piles but removal of all other trash and debris). In addition, the City's code enforcement officers enforce property maintenance problems APPROVED: I kk.eL Donald D v ckworth City Manager • w • 4/6/93 Page 3 1 • e. DENNIS A LOJESKI i �; _ MAYOR PROTEMPORE II ig : /11\∎.=. r`# 240 West Huntington Drive GEORGE ASCHING i- ' ' _� P.O.Box 60 ROBERT C.HARBICHT �\��jot Arcadia,California 91066-0060 BOB MARGETT �t`ORpORATI9,�a (818)574-5400 COUNCIL 4v1EMBERS •DONALD R.DUCKWORTH JOSEPH C. CIRAULO JUNE D ALFORD CITY MANAGER MAYOR CITY CLERK August 6, 1993 w 114 L ---- ;66- . Barbara S. Marcussen, President Rancho Santa Anita Property Owner's Association 925 Singingwood Drive Arcadia, CA 91006 Subject: 931 Hampton Road • Dear Mrs. Marcussen: This letter is in response to your July 28, 1993 correspondence regardin: several concerns which your association has with the residential project at 931 ampton Road. _The following addresses each issue, as summarized in your letter: 1. Cleanup of the building site. I have forwarded a copy of your letter to ur Code Enforcement Officer, Julie Clift, who will contact the property owner and request that the property be cleared of all debris and weeds. If you wish any follow-up information on this matter, please call the Code Enforcement Officer at (818) 574- 5437. 2. Landscaping. I am not aware of any landscape plans that were approved by your Home Owner's Association on October 4, 1991. The structural plans, ich are currently on file with the Building Department, do not contain any landsca, plans since the City does not require such plans for single-family projects. Municipal Code Section 9251.2.13., requires that the yards and setback areas of single- family projects be landscaped with lawn, trees, shrubs, or other planted r�aterials. The location and type of landscaping is left to the discretion of the property owner. I will request that the landscaping of the subject property be completed prior to the final building inspection; however, I cannot require a specific type of tree or shrub to be planted, as requested in your letter. It is my understanding that a Home Owner's Association does not have the authority to request such action to be taken upon a property owner, because the review of landscaping is not set forth in any of the • design review regulations. In my opinion this issue can only be resolved by having the neighboring property owners contact the owner of the site to express their concerns regarding the proposed landscaping. They may find that the owner already has intentions of planting dense landscaping along the property lines to secure their privacy. 3. Completion of construction. The Building Department has granted a 6-month extension for this project, which extended the building permit's expiration date to November 17, 1993. No other extensions will be granted; therefore, the property owner must resume construction in a timely manner or he will be facing costly renewal fees. If you have any other questions regarding the above, or if you need darification on the responses, please feel free to contact me at 574-5423. Si re y, UJ l.L Corkran W. Nicholson Senior Planner . cc: Bill Tarin, Building Inspector, Julie Clift, Code Enforcement'Officer • • • • • 2 • • • RA \ ' J PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC . ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA " " ' . 925 Singingwood Drive - -. July 28, 1993 Arcadia Planning Board Arcadia City Hall 240 W. Huntington Dr. • Arcadia, CA 91006 Dear Sirs: . The prolonged construction schedule.'of the residence at 931 Hampton Road is of great concern to the residents of the Upper Rancho. On behalf of the Rancho Santa Anita Property Owners Association we ask that the authorities of the City undertake forceful action to effect the following: 1. Cleanup of the building site, 2. Planting of shrubbery and trees along the adjacent property lines to shield the adjacent properties in with the landscaping plans approved by the Architectural Review Board on October 4, 1991, 3. Completion of construction under the extended building permit Issued May 17,1993. The initial approval by the Association's Architectural Review Board was issued June 30, 1990. As we enter the fourth year of construction,.the property owner should be motivated by whatever means are available to the City to clear the building site of debris and to proceed with landscaping so as to protect the privacy of the neighbors and to rid the neighborhood of a horrible eyesore. We understand that the new building permits have been issued each six months from the initial issue, the most recent extending the construction period until November 17, 1993. We believe that the property owner should be notified that the site cleanup and landscaping must be accomplished within the time span of the present permit. Both of the adjoining neighbors have expressed the need for assurance that the trees d shrubs will be planted within the property line of the subject property with sufficien height to protect their privacy. We understand that the planting of Ficus Niteda, a tall slender bush, would be very appropriate for this purpose. . • The members of this Association will appreciate positive action on this request. Yours very truly, ' Barbara S. Marcussen, President A. L tonio, Chairman ARB cc Mr. and Mrs. Ching-An Lai Arcadia City Council Mr.and Mrs. Charles Draper Mrs. Shirley Spencer hl" 0-14 , ■•• 0S-30 3 s l• 0x`'71 •j • December 7, 1993 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: William R. Kell , Assistant City Manager/Community Development Director By: Donna Butler, Assistant Community Development Director/ Planning ,p,/ RE: County of Los Angeles Home Improvement Loan Program SUMMARY Staff is requesting the City Council to consider participation in the County of Los Angeles' Home Improvement Loan Program which provides below-market interest rates to qualified homeowners to reinvest in their properties and to correct deferred maintenance problems. DISCUSSION In December, 1991, the County of Los Angeles developed a countywide Home Improvement Loan Program. The loan program provides below-market interest rate rehabilitation financing to low- and moderate-income homeowners to repai or improve their properties throughout Los Angeles County. Recently, the Los Angeles County Community Development Commission (CDC) invited cities that have a Cooperation Agreement with the CDC to have access t loan funds at absolutely NO COST, other than administrative cost to the City. T7he Program is designed to help the County and participating cities to meet the existing need for affordable private capital to finance rehabilitation work. Interested cities are required to sign a Cooperation Agreement which outlines the specific responsibilities of the City and the CDC. The Home Improvement Loan Program would be an extension of the City's cu ent CDBG funded Housing Rehabilitation Program. The Housing Rehabilitation Program offers participants a maximum grant of up to $10,000 for repairs and maintenance to their owner occupied dwellings. This Program would allow Home Improvement Loan December 7, 1993 Page 1 qualified home owners the opportunity to use the funds available through the loan program to do major repair work and/or add on a bedroom,bathroom, etc. Unlike the City's current "Housing Rehabilitation Program", the Loan Program is able to assist a broader income range of residents. The reduced interest rate loans . e an important incentive for homeowners to reinvest in their properties and corr ' deferred maintenance items. i The following is a summary of the Home Improvement Loan Program: Loan Interest Rates The program offers interest rates based on the income group to be served and the CDBG eligibility of a particular household. For moderate-income homeowners, "Unassisted" loans will bear an interest rate of 7.9%. For borrowers at or below 80'0 of median income, CDBG Assisted loans will bear an interest rate of 3% provided the borrower has the ability to pay. Loan Amounts and Term Loan amounts may range from a minimum of $5,000 to a maximum of $101,150 maximum. People earning over 80% of the median, may borrow money at 7.9% interest. These are called "Unassisted loans". People earning under 80% of the median may borrow money at 3% interest. Th e are called "CDBG Assited Loans". Loans under 7.9% are subsidized by the Community Development Commission (CDC) using CDBG funds to subsidize th- loan. Based on the loan amount, the term of the loan may range from 8 to 15 years. Program loans are not assumable. Eligible Borrowers Eligible borrowers must own and occupy the home to be improved. Program loa s would be limited to borrowers who are owner-occupants of up to 2 unit properties only. Homeowners who wish to obtain a loan must: ji • Own and occupy the house as a principal residence for at least two years after the rehabilitation work; and _. Home Improvement Loan December 7, 11993 Page 2 • Not exceed the gross income limits outlined below: • Unassisted loans: In order to obtain a 7.9% fixed interest loan, the maxim income shall be: 1 or 2 persons ($48,436),or 3 or more persons ($55,701) regardless of family size; and • CDBG Assisted Loans (80% of Median Income) Low/Mod Household Size Income Limit 1 persons $27,050 2 persons $30,900 3 persons $34,800 4 persons $38,650 5 persons $41,750 6 persons $44,800 7 persons $47,900 8 persons $51,000 Eligible Improvements Eligible Improvements include any permanent improvements that will improv- the basic livability or energy efficiency of the property or are necessary to remedy conditions presenting a danger to health and safety. Swimming pools, hot tubs and other recreational facilities are not eligible improvements. Disbursements All moneys are placed in a disbursement account and disbursed at the discretion of the City as the borrower provides documentation to the city of the completion of work. All work must be completed within twelve months from the date of loan closings Loan Fees Loans are made available through the Bank of America. The Borrower would be responsible for any and all out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the lender, such s the appraisal fee, credit report and title insurance. Out-of-pocket expenses and loan origination fees may be included in the loan. Home Improvement Loan December 7 1993 Page 3 CQmnmunity Development Commission's Role The Community Development Commission (CDC) will promote the Program with our assistance and encourage residents with rehabilitation needs to take advantage of the program. Under this program the Community Development Commission will: i • Review completed loan application packages before submission to the lender. • Establish disbursement procedures acceptable to the Lender, the County and e City. • Facilitate communication between the City, the Lender and the Applicant. City's Participation The Home Loan Program requires pre-qualifying all loans prior to submitting th- applications to the Community Development Commission. In addition, there is the normal administration and inspection process which is required prior to disbursement of funds. These tasks are similar to the tasks completed as part of the City's Housing Rehabilitation Program. Jordan Good who currently manages the City's Housing Rehabilitation Program could administer this program for an additional fee of$150.00 per applicant. This,is the cost for reviewing and processing the loan papers. In addition to the loan cos s, there would be the administration and inspection costs of$725.00 per applicant. All of these fees would be paid with Community Development Block Grant (CD;G) funds as part of the Housing Rehabilitation Program. It is staff's opinion that the e costs are very reasonable costs based upon the amount of paperwork that will be necessary to qualify a homeowner. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Not applicable. FISCAL IMPACT None. All costs are paid for with Community Development Block Grant (CDBG funds. i . Home Improvement Loan December 7, 1993 1 Page 4 RECOMMENDATION, What The City Needs To Do Each participating city re q atin ci is uired to execute an Agreement outlining the responsibilities of the Community Development Commission (CDC) and the Participating City. Loan funds are available to Cities on a first-come, first-serve basis from the date of execution of the Agreement until August 1, 1994 or until the funds run out. The City is under NO OBLIGATION to make loans under the Program and may withdraw from the Program at any time. Notification to the CDC by the City will indicate to the CDC to halt any marketing efforts underway in that City. Action If the City Council wishes to participate in the Home Program to provide low- interest funds to qualified homeowners, the Council should direct staff to execu the attached Cooperation Agreement between the Community Development Commission and the City. Approved by: 1/4 Donald Duckworth,City�►{anager I , i I i . Home Improvement Loan December '71, 1993 Page 5 COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AND THE Participating City With a Rehabilitation Staff The Participating City agrees to: I. Provide the CDC with a letter of authorization to provide Home Mortgages loans to the City's residents. 2. Complete and submit a Community Data Sheet (Attachment 1) to enable the CDC to assess the City's rehabilitation needs and to continue to meet the Program requirements. 3. Perform the obligations set forth for 'the Locality' outlined in Section 5.2 (a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(the Locality(t(d)(e)nt. 5.4 (a)(b), and 5.5 of the Responsibilities of 2). 4. Submit completed loan application packages to the CDC for review b fore submission to the Lender (as such terms is used in the Responsibiliti s of the Locality, attached hereto). 5. Warrant that the Lender shall be held harmless from any acts of State and/or Federal credit granting Statutes and regulations. Employees hall not express credit-worthiness opinions to Home Mortgages loan applicants . Responsibilities of the CDC 1. Review completed loan application packages before submission to the L nder. 2. Establish disbursement procedures acceptable to the Lender, the Coun y and the City. 3. Facilitate communication between the City, the Lender and the Appli ant. County of Los Angeles Participating City Representative Representative Carlos Jackson, Executive Director Date Date coopagr Nez7 �.; . Mein otandum �. ..:.,..... 1� �� 3 COUNCIL December 7, 1993 TO: Mayor, City Council and Redevelopment Agency FROM: William R. Kelly, Assi tant City Manager/Community Development. Director 6114! By:n Peter P. Kinnaha istant Community Development v I Director/Economic Development Division Prepared by: Dale R. Connors, Redevelopment Project eg,Manager/_Economic Development Division RE: Redevelopment Agency Annual Report to the State SUMMARY: . California Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code §33080) requires that all redevelopment agencies file an annual fiscal and housing activity report with Legislative Body (City Council) , the California Department of Housing and. Community Development (HCD) and State Controller within 6 months of the end of the fiscal year. The attached report was prepared to satisfy this requirement. Since this document is to report on Agency status for Fiscal Year 1992-93, the information provided within it represents Agency activities as they existed as of June 30, 1993. The Annual Report is divided into nine sections as follows: I. INTRODUCTION II. CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT. PROJECT AREA . III. COMPARISON OF AGENCY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES (FY 1992-93) IV. WORK PROGRAM FOR THE COMING YEAR (FY 1993-94) V. HOUSING SET ASIDE VI. . RESIDENTIAL DISPLACEMENT, CONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION DATA VII. LEGISLATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS VIII. FISCAL STATEMENT - IV. FINANCIAL AUDIT A final copy of this report is to be submitted to the City Council, HCD and the State Controller by December 31, 1993. LASER t;= Redevelopment Agency Annual Report December 7, 1993 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Agency: That the Arcadia Redevelopment Agency present the FY 1992-93 Annual Report to the Arcadia City Council for approval and authorization to transmit it to HCD and State Controller. Council: That the Arcadia City Council approve the FY 1992-93 Annual Report and authorize and direct staff to transmit it to HCD and State Controller. Attachments: Arc• • ia ! edevelo•ment Agency Annual Report Approved: L.. 1 u�a!, City Manager ./ E -cutive Director ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ANNUAL REPORT TO THE STATE FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 .4.110141.1.1111. Ck 41Y „0 ARCADIA•/000 CO oN• cb RATES CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION A. The City B. The Arcadia Redevelopment Agency H. CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA III. COMPARISON OF AGENCY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES - FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 IV. WORK PROGRAM FOR THE COMING YEAR V. HOUSING SET ASIDE VI. RESIDENTIAL DISPLACEMENT, CONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION DATA VII. LEGISLATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS VIII. FISCAL STATEMENT IX. FINANCIAL REPORT EXHIBITS - A - Regional Location Map B - Central Redevelopment Project Area Map C - FY 1992-93 Redevelopment Opportunit Location Map D - Downtown Revitalization Strategy Program Map E - Annual Report of Housing Activity (HCD) F - Resolution No. ARA-169 G - Resolution No. ARA-173 H - Annual Report of Financial Transactions (Controller) I - Arcadia Redevelopment Agency Financial Statements • I. INTRODUCTION A. THE CITY The City of Arcadia, with a population of approximately 48,900, is a residential community with an expanding commercial base, located in the San Gabriel Valley region of _Los Angeles County (Exhibit A, Regional Location Map) . The City was incorporated in 1903 and has a five member City Council which is elected at large. B. THE ARCADIA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY On, December 17, 1968, the Arcadia City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1396, declaring the need for a redevelopment agency and designating itself as the governing body of the Agency. The current Agency members are as follows: Office Occupant . Chairman Joeseph C. Ciraulo Chairman Protempore Dennis A. Lojeski Board Member " George Fasching' • Board Member Robert C. Harbicht Board Member Bob Margett On December 26, 1973, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1490 establishing the Central Redevelopment Project. II. CENTRAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA The Central Redevelopment Project area consists of 252 acres of land located in Arcadia's traditional central business district. The land uses within the area are primarily (although not exclusively) commercial, retail and industrial in nature. The Central Redevelopment Project has an estimated completion date of December 26, 2026. The total amount of tax increment dollars which may be divided and allocated to the Agency pursuant to the Plan is two hundred million dollars ($200,000,000) . The Project Area is depicted in Exhibit B • , _ . . . . . .• , . . REGIONAL LOCATION MAP , . ,. . ■ SAN . • • . • • • . . . ...,, FERNANDO "Ire, . . . . . . c is, • • 1"270 • -. LA CANADA ' . . --. . VAN ' • Z NUYS - -f,E, , cc • ' , - v GLENDALE ENiuRA . . FREE WON * PASADENA ARCADIA - — . g . 40_ FREEWAY 8 -co 1-210 HOLLYWOOD . . • ' 4. A.:94..e covihA 1, 9 .. . SAN BERNARD/No 2 0E.E.V0 ef` ---, i. • If. BEVERLY ' HILLS • - CULVER LOS '411161 4' Ellifi.. • & , + I . .e. './ CITY '2 ANGELES 5c) , 44.. 44, '9USTRY 0 IND ce , 4. . • . 4.14,, BELL i -, • . 4/ WHITTIER -, a • ., < w w . . ). g LT, , a ' , COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES\\\\ MARINA cc , - 1-------CUINTY OF ORANGE DEL RAY . ' 4?. Pe, - l . . . . I et, . . BREA .. ' HAWTHORNE 3 ) f‘ . rj - YORBA ' 4 ...i_ , LINDA MANHATTAN .v Go X t 3 . ARTESIA FREEW41, I ----■., • BEACH • ....... i • t CARSON i . . LAKEWOOD -- ' . • • ,,, ... i • 1) J REDONDO - TORRANCE ' . BEACH ' cc ' . ' •r".J -PALO% pAcapc. COAST GARDEN ; . HIGHWAY - GROVE V FREE WAY • • VERDES . • LONG . GARQEN 00 ' ' . BEACH 1 0 o • • . .■ . ROLLING. . ,,.' ri ----ii,,? -_,) • - SANTA HILLS it- --. -'{-: ' SEAL , 44In . L...,__ . . . , _ .... ... , . . ..• , -- 4==1 • • . . . • . . . _____:- . • • . PACIFIC OCEAN • - . . . . • • " . . . • --) . . . , " . . . • . . • ' - . . • ' . • Exhibit A • ' - . • ♦♦ P F .Foo<4/ • •RHD I .01 D RHO R L Q% o Newman jilt, s-• N' _ CG R LD het. �- 'e,/ 1 RHD /RHO' RHD CG,J %. Colorado Blvd, II Ngli I :ICGI RHO I,ICGI RHO%♦ 1' 9 I <I.I i •' I<I �� �- !r I La Porte St. • L , F .♦w 1 lir\ CO . 1 I d cGn I Itlhiii I 1 % s� � ICG/1 a Saint • lose h St. PD e 1 I = I 1 I ∎�■ W. N % 0 Santa Clara St. . 1, • e s� , — e CG � CG u < rte`• on .. - • 1 -tom • f CG A H Wheeler " Ave. 4 PD P D %. `� C G I • C G I I CG �)o ' \ .. CO _ % ECG Huntington Drive �, _ 1 CG I I CG IO ® — y I RHD _.- - ICd ICGI RHD ,) CG t PD+,o ♦♦tr + GEND rt se% RHD Residential High Density. I Industrial co RLD Residential Low Density PF Public Facilities CO Commercial Office PD Pionned Development NORTH October, 1986 CG Commercial General ww on Project Areo Boundary I" 600' III. COMPARISON OF AGENCY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES - FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 A number of redevelopment opportunities were identified in last year's Annual Report which were pursued by the Agency during the reporting period subject to this report. They are described below and are depicted on Exhibits C and D: A. The Northside Project (Santa Clara and Second) Entered into discussions with Western Security Bank (Parcel D) , Emkay Development (Parcel E) , L.A.County Flood Control District and the Army Corp. of Engineers (Santa Anita Wash) , the City of Arcadia (St. Joseph Reservoir) and Robert Johnson (215 No. Second Ave. ) concerning the feasibility of assembling and developing a 12+ acre site for use by a warehouse style retail user. While both Western Security Bank and Emkay have failed to develop Parcels D and E respectively as envisioned in the November, 1987 Northside Project DDA as amended, they remain bound by the terms and conditions of that document and amendments. The Agency will continue to work with them (and adjacent owners as necessary) to complete the Northside Project. The Agency continued processing the Derby Parcel Map (240 E. Huntington Dr. ) . Subsequent to the end of this reporting period, the Agency completed and recorded the Derby Parcel Map. B. Southwest Corner Project (Huntington and Second) The Agency continued to market the site to the development community as an office/retail site. On November 2, 1992, the Agency entered into an exclusive commercial brokerage agreement with Hayes and Company for the purpose of publicizing the Southwest and Northwest Corner sites to the development community. C. Northwest Corner Project (Huntington and Second) - See comments for Item B above. D. Downtown Revitalization Strategy and Program The Redevelopment Agency and City of Arcadia initiated a comprehensive physical and economic review of Downtown Arcadia. With the assistance of a revitalization specialist (Freedmann, Tung and Bottomley) , a series of four community workshops were held at which were discussed the future of Downtown. Coming out of this process was a concept plan • FY 1992-93 REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY LOCATIONS am ein no ,■, P F _-��• Foot • Southwest Corner Project •o ?� ht't • Northwest Corner Project 1C `` • NBC Project RHO I Ell D RHD R L i% F // • Newman . 4 CG : : 14 \ .'e r RHD /RHD ����� C•lorado Siv ♦N11111 :— me RHD , >�IEHD , 1 i ii51 I . I CS 1 14 Illillik % !: I • La Porte SEI- • 11/4C0 1 1 1 0. 66/1 ® III M■ 1 1 ' 3: I Ilb;ii. I IMINIMINNII I 0_ i ICG/I w Saint -• Jose , h S I 14-06,19 111111 Aa iit\i‘ C 7p Santa Clara St WNW ♦ \ o c CG l CC � _ \ C G 'A Wheeler Are. o, ° P D P O •♦♦\\ C O`- :r . C G C G I ( C G �Ni . .; _ ' \ +, +CG _ I CG I m I CG } Huntington Drive I _ . _>,■__ CC II ® t IN CG lICGI 1 Qv I RHD_..._.._;ICGI RHD , tt C G P D X r-=---m�'T . . LOCATION MAP . • . . ..._ , . . ______,.• :... ,„ovate, H • •T 174 IA " '-- - 4 Ns f. *Vrill2VAIP.' Doe \ 1- 3 C 4n. °Ani nel:-qi % PFooniu milt le ,. 0 ocia ''.5 et • 1 •. 1 7, I 1, INTFILY -..-. . .., . • m, 4 \ . Av4 gI , • 0 Ave. ,". _ . Arno' tM . 4 4 : z 1 . P •. . :e. • • . - If . - I Flor1 1 a 121- .°- t 111,„ •IRIF Q. t -. , ,.... -.1 . :• . . 1 . . . . ... .:.-.),...., •- ; ! A a • • 1 .. -w..t/laili . .. 4 . ., 1 1 , Imir. -, '''!"_ . •,*,;,‘ _ '' .", - ,,,,,, --4,- .._ av- _ _ ......:- - - _ . - : rill!Mill., 1 lip • .,t.;4; S 40C . ip ..„..„:„.... .....7,,,„ .. _ , . 1., ,,,,,,•,„,.,,,,.„. ..„ -- - 711t pplillmisiwwl „,„:" , ,.„ .4 -igi- 4" 1'I - ' ''-'". ' '-•.`-- ' . . ' : .... . IIIIPIE '• ..-:—.. P.°.P *•i. 1. Z. ,. •__ LL. , . A . E, --°- IT,p No.F,- ,,. . v• - ' - ' :Pi -ii:..`4‘ — .::, • .:. •.saN.. .,. WrinTR=lossiEcramo A --- • . •,..!..' '.......*......''' .,:., ---v----- •N mizurt-110111 't•-.• - - al klit„.41*-04t ., % ':-. . ,... ,. _....... • - ,AO , . 1.-.- 7-,' h.Ajwipt. ,,. 2 ,,; .,,,,.-,,,,., .:., -„,...4,. -tf,1 , _ • . A it„ .,i,,,o,--:it, .,•,„....:;lici:...45:. 1 t..., 1 . ,., . . . . MR! 'k. pArz4v 441... - --../squNly. V' i immi ii% Illitikk,i, ,' i ,i,... .:.Y'N°.■.4.7 ......., 'POPkirt ••••••: ::;---....-.spighl#411111WiTir.11 1,. "..0.• . . . • • ,..4. /.—m,mrs:- .1 1...-Er 1"17:77111111PI .. ' 7 %. • -;,• •1:9::.....:: ..1 •;11111111111 illUP -,JIL : I 1"11111 14.% le.::•• .::ft: :la;.... ; ... 1 - ...1.::. ' 1 .,_ -___ : ', .:, Ari 7-. • . .-.I .. ... .. .. ... .■ .... 41-;r1 cC ...: SOMA ANITA•. .. .. A. .. 4, istikt . ... ., .... . . 1 p. ....‘ die.. 4-.4.....iil.:,..ipit -' '' ...GOLF COME i 7! ".. _. 1 - '6°11.-7, . .:77i ..;•,•:,;., 1"i.."61. .:.;:r..01.117Arco . _ .,,,a0_ . ... !PrriiiAlquA....,Hui_, .. 1 _.- - ii!.111 mar 1*-;:i-, P •-.1't,I ii -: " ' r . . ,, ...„, . ..c 1 . .vs ' g two lro k • ,, -- i i i ''' •— .. y- . - j Ma• .1 1. \I. ... •ti, „ RI , .:1. .n VI tali . Kart , ..• . . ,., ,,Ln , 1, 1 -1 IlY . :• —: MIIRRUM11.11 — II ' k- • jp ,_... ,.. - ... -A, 111 mr‘ llfra. 1) 11 Ilf, l'r ' . Now— Miff,.1111017; 41 Boundaries of the Downtown .• Revitalization Strategy Program , ..........., , • Boundaries of the Central Redevelopment Project Area • North . • Exhibit D • which contemplated construction of new public improvements along Huntington Drive, creation of a business incentive program, development of a`" precise plan for the area (addressing parking, signage, land use, building density, architecture, etc. ) , and future phased development .within the area of infill sites. F. KBC Project (124 No. First Ave. ) The Agency issued a Certificate of Completion for this 3,223 square foot professional office building.. IV. WORK PROGRAM FOR THE COMING YEAR - FISCAL YEAR 1993-94 General Activities - • The Agency will develop a Housing Strategy during the coming fiscal year which will combine an update of the City Housing Element and State redevelopment requirements concerning providing housing. • Process building permit applications through the Agency's design review process. • Conduct public relations activities with developers and the general public. Conduct a commercial space availability survey and provide the results of the survey to the public. • Prepare agendas, meeting set-up, minutes, correspondence, staff reports and other materials for the Parking District Commission. • Sought development proposals for approved projects (SWC/ NWC) . Project Specific Activities - • Northside Project (Santa Clara and Second) The Agency will continue to work with the property owners in the area concerning the feasibility of assembling and developing a 12+ acre site for use by a warehouse style retail user. Alternatively, the Agency shall work with property owners in the area to develop. the .Northside Project in a manner consistent with the November 17, 1987 DDA between the Agency and Emkay Development Co. (as amended) . • Southwest Corner Project. (Second/Huntington) The Agency will continue to market the site to the development community as an office/retail site. This site has been identified by the City's downtown revitalization consultant (Freedman, Tung and Bottomley) as a key opportunity site. • Northwest Corner Project (Second/Huntington) The Agency will continue to market the site to the development community as an office/retail site. This site has been identified by the, City's downtown revitalization consultant (Freedman, Tung and Bottomley) as a possible commuter rail station site. • Downtown Revitalization Strategy and Program (DRSP) The Redevelopment Agency and City of Arcadia will continue to implement the adopted DRSP concept (ie, streetscape, Precise Plan and Business Incentive components) during the coming fiscal year. . V. HOUSING SET ASIDE Detailed figures on housing set aside funds collected by the Agency and, their expenditure are available in the 1992-93 Annual Report of Housing Activity (Exhibit E) . One June 2, 1992, the Agency adopted Resolution No. 'ARA-169 (Exhibit. F) declaring that it is unable to set aside 20% or less of its FY1992-93. tax. increment for low/moderate income housing due to existing Agency obligations, programs, projects and activities. On July 20, 1993, the Agency adopted Resolution No. ARA-173 (Exhibit G) declaring that it is unable to set aside 20% or less of its FY1993-94 tax increment for low/moderate income housing due to existing Agency obligations, programs, projects and activities. Notwithstanding the above resolutions,. the Agency's FY 1992-93 housing set aside obligation was $472,878. The total set aside balance as of June 30, 1993 is $2,691,378. VI. . RESIDENTIAL DISPLACEMENT, CONSTRUCTION AND REHABILITATION DATA During the reporting period covered in this report, the Agency undertook no activities affecting residential uses. Neither construction nor clearance activites were pursued. VII. LEGISLATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS That redevelopment agency funds not be used to balance the State budget. VIII. FISCAL STATEMENT The following reports are included herein as exhibits: Exhibit E - Housing Activity Report to HCD Exhibit H - Annual Report of Financial Transactions IX. FINANCIAL AUDIT The Agency's annual audit conducted by Lance, Soll and Lunghard is included here as Exhibit I. EXIIIBITS E, F, G, H AND I These Exhibits are available for review in the Economic Development Division of the Community Development Department. 6680 - 32 / # h :; Memorandum O p if tEO" DATE: Dec. . 7, 1993 TO: Arcadia Redevelopment Agency '. FROM: William Kelly, Assistant City Manager/ Community Development Director .By. `Peter Kinnahan, Assistant Community Development Director/Economic Development SUBJECT: REQUEST TO APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR PREPARATION "OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (E.I.R. ) FOR THE DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION STREETSCAPE PROJECT Summary The Redevelopment Agency and City Council on August 3, 1993 approved the Downtown Revitalization Strategy and Program concept (DRSP) and authorized staff to proceed with the design of the Streetscape project and with the environmental assessment of the DRSP Streetscape project. Discussion . In order to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (C.E.Q.A. ) for review of potentially significant adverse impacts resulting from the implementation of the Streetscape phase of the DRSP, staff forwarded a Request for Proposal (RFP) , to five (5) pre-qualified environmental consulting. firms on November 2, 1993 . Three (3) of these firms attended a briefing. meeting November 9, 1993 and two (2) of these firms subsequently submitted a proposal . (The Planning . Center from Newport , Beach and The Planning Corporation from Santa Barbara) . Staff of the Public Works and Community Development Departments reviewed the proposals and interviewed The Planning Corporation to review their proposal, schedule, and fee. Further, staff contacted ' their references, checking on qualifications and work performance: the references for The Planning Corporation were excellent. Based upon the reference checks, the interviews and the proposed work program, staff recommends The Planning Corporation (TPC) to prepare the E.I.R. for the Streetscape project for several reasons: ARA LASER IMAGED ARA 12/01/93 Page 2 1) TPC's proposal was qualitively superior to that of The Planning Center in their reply to the RFP, 2) TPC's schedule for completing the assignment was consistent with the Agency's schedule, 3) TPC's references were all positive about TPC and Mr., Craig, principal of the company, 4) TPC's projected costs were over $20,000 less than those of The Planning Center. Subsequent to receipt of the proposals, and preliminary staff selection of the environmental consultant to recommend to the Agency, certain traffic circulation and parking issues were raised at the November 22 Community Workshop by the public. These issues require additional analytical work by the consultant in order to ensure that all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts are reviewed. In an effort to keep on the agreed construction schedule, staff has requested that The Planning Corporation (TPC) provide a revised scope of services and cost for this additional work by Monday, December 6. Staff will provide a report on the revised proposal from TPC to the Agency on Monday evening. Please remember that this environmental assessment assignment is only for the Streetscape component of the DRSP. Environmental assessment of the Precise Plan is not included in this assignment and will be prepared at a future date. Fiscal Impact TPC's initial reply to the Agency's RFP was $15, 191. This fee will increase because of the requested additional work to address. all potentially significant adverse environmental impacts. Recommendation Recommend that the. Redevelopment Agency authorize the Executive Director or designee to execute a contract, approved by the Agency Attorney, with The Planning Corporation for environmental consulting services for the Streetscape component of the DRSP for an amount to be determined at the Agency meeting. APPr ed L. \ DONALD R. DUCKWORT . city Manager 3 6 Fro °F :11 !Polk! Memorandum 41 =, ; � 0 fMc°*PoRATBg's oA DATE: Dec. 7, 1993 TO: Arcadia Redevelopment Agency/City Council FROM: William Kelly, Assistant City Manager/ DV Community Development Director "_______q By: I -Peter Kinnahan, Assistant Community Development Director/Economic Development SUBJECT: ADDITION TO SCOPE OF WORK FOR DRSP ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (AGENDA ITEM 4B) In our Agenda report (4b) we informed the Redevelopment Agency that Community Development staff had requested that The Planning Corporation (TPC) review the comments provided by the public at the November 22 Community Workshop and provide a revised proposal to us by today. Staff of the Public Works and Community Development Departments (Planning and Economic Development) have reviewed the proposal submitted by TPC., as well as the revised proposal submitted by TPC's sub-consultant, Associated Traffic Engineers. The revised scope addresses in more detail parking and circulation concerns raised by the public at the Workshop. Much of the work entails collection and analysis of current data on parking inventory, future supply, roadway traffic volumes, intersection utilization, traffic signal synchronization, ' traffic circulation/diversion, and possible air quality modelling. ' (Much of this data will be available not only for the environmental assessment of this project but also for the assessment of the proposed downtown Precise Plan, which the City Council will be reviewing in the future) . This data and analysis, along with a discussion of alternatives, cumulative impacts and a mitigation measures program will be prepared by the consultant as a Focussed Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) . EIR - December 7 Page 2 Because of the public interest in this project, staff recommends that additional notice of proposed December 15 and 16 environmental scoping meetings be provided as follows: Mailing to all Assessed Owners and Business Owners in the DRSP area: $650.00 - Legal Notice of Scoping Meetings in Pasadena Star News: $250. 00 - One Quarter Page Ad in Pasadena Star News: $600. 00 Total: $1,500. 00 Cost 1. Consultant cost - The consultant's revised costs are not to exceed $35,000. This includes a 10% contingency. Approximately 60% of the overall budget will be for the traffic subconsultant: $35, 000.00 2. Notice and Advertising Cost: $1,500.00 Total: $36, 500. 00 Recommendation That the Redevelopment Agency authorize the Executive Director, or designee, to execute a contract prepared by the Agency Attorney for environmental consulting services with The Planning Corporation in an amount not to exceed $35,000; and That the Agency authorize the expenditure of $1,500 for additional notice and advertising of the environmental scoping meetings as set for ab ve. Le)\ Executive Director