RDA Min 1998-06-08 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

. . I '" 5. Staff and consultants limited responses to questions and comments; Director Church responded to concerns raised during the public comment. He said - the Redevelopment Agency does not have the power to tax, and will not increase taxes. Director Church said being placed in a Redevelopment Area does not mean property will be taken or relocated, nor does it necessarily mean something negative will be done. He said the Redevelopment Agency believes it is a positive act by providing an opportunity for funding to existing or potential businesses. Director Church said some lenders have said they like projects in a Redevelopment District because it provides an additional source of funding for improvements or equity. He said when the 2nd Amendment was passed no one envisioned what would happen with Franklin Street, there were no plans at the City level or by developers. He said the Franklin Street Project is only possible because of the redevelopment power, the ability to aggregate parcels. Director Church said that kind of event might be possible for any of the four areas being proposed. He described the Lone Star Company Batch Plant on EI Camino Real and said the owners told the City/Agency that they were not going to get out of the sand and gravel business, "we are a heavy industry and we are not interested in land speculation. Three months later they sold the site." Director Church said things change over time. Director Church said the proposed boundary is not rectilinear, "but the mandate trom the Council was to incorporate those parcels into the Redevelopment District that we could support on a blighting argument that faced on the 101 Corridor. And that is what - this attempts to do." Director Church said the vacancies were determined by a "snapshot in time. It was done some time ago" in order to get the data collated, through the Planning Commission process and into the written Report. He said it could not be continually updated. Director Church said the consultants determined that the blighted argument could be sustained on the entire area, and that is "the fact you have to consider. It is not a parcel by parcel analysis. It's the cumulative impact of blight throughout the area both of a physical and economic nature." In response to Vice MayorNice Chairman Ruskin's questions regarding vacancy discrepancies, Director Church said, "The information could well be changed somewhat." He said he didn't know if there were errors in the data, but that was a possibility. Director Church said the vacancy rate that was found at the time of the survey was included in the Report, and he didn't know what it was at this time. Council Member/Director Claire asked that staff clearly describe the relocation policies in a Report by January 22, 1998, so everyone would know what to expect if in fact at some point in time relocation was required. He also asked for the data on the relocation efforts during the Sequoia Station and Mezes project. MEMO 6/10/98 - AGENDA FOR THE JOINT PUBLIC HEARING MINUTE BOOK NO. I JUNE 8,1998 AND CONCURRENT MEETING WITH THE Page No. 490 PAGE 15 CITY COUNCIL