Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978 08 09 CC MIN1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉMADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE BALDWIN PARK CITY COUNCIL CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 14403 E. Pacific Avenue AND AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, BALDWIN PARK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY The meeting was called to order at the above place at 7:30 p.m. The flag salute was led by Councilman McNeill. Roll call: Present: COUNCILMEN AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DIRECTORS BLEWETT, IZELL, MC NEILL AND WHITE Absent: COUNCILMEN AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY DIRECTOR AGUILAR Arr.7:44 p.m.) Also Present: CITY MANAGER/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SEXTON. CITY/AGENCY ATTORNEY FLANDRICK, DIRECTOR OF ADM. SERVICES HALLOWAY, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT RAPHIEL AND CITY CLERK BALKUS Absent: CITY TREASURER MONTENEGRO EXCUSE ABSENCE OF COUNCILMAN AGUILAR. WHITE/IZELL. There were no objections. EXCUSE ABSENCE OF CITY TREASURER MONTENEGRO. MC NEILL/IZELL. There were no objections. 00- Mayor Blewett This is a combined meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and the Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency. The members of the City Council also sit as the members of the Redevelopment Agency. The purpose of this meeting is to conduct a public hearing of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency on the proposed Redevelopment Plan for the Puente-Merced Redevelop- ment Project and upon the Environmental Impact Report for the Project. Mr. Sexton, the Executive Director, will now present those matters. 00- Mr. Sexton Mr. Chairman & Council, at this time I would like to enter into the record the following documents: affidavit of publication of notice of public hearing; certificate of mailing of notice, with letter, to property owners; certificate of mailing notice, with letter, to taxing agencies; and I understand notices of adjourned regular meetings of both City Council and Redevelopment Agency have been posted and will be supplied with affidavits at a later time. Mayor Blewett These documents will be made part of the record. 00- 1 will now call the public hearing open. Under the law it is my responsib1i11ty to preside over this joint public hearing. The State law under which we are acting is the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California. Continued) AUGUST 9, 1978 7:30 P.M. FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL EXCUSE ABSENCE COUNCILMAN AGUILAR EXCUSE ABSENCE CITY TREASURER MONTENEGRO PURPOSE OF MEETING PUBLIC HEARING REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR PUENTE/MERCED PROJECT & E.I.R. PUBLICATION OF HEARING AND MAILING OF NOTICES AFFIDAVIT OF MEETING ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC HEARING OPENED BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉMAdjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency Persons making statements and giving testimony wilt be sworn and wilt be subject to questions through the Chair. A11 persons desiring to speak wi11 be given an opportunity to do so, We will first hear detailed staff testimony and then hear all public testimony. Our order of procedure tonight wi11 be the following: the staff wi11 present evidence and testimony in support of the Redevelopment Plan; we wi11 then receive any written comments; and then we wi11 receive evidence and oral testimony from persons in the audience. At this time we wi11 have the swearing in of witnesses. Anyone from the audience who would wish to testify on the Redevelopment Plan wi11 please stand and be sworn in by the City Clerk. Mrs. Batkus Raise your right h?nd please and swear that any testimony you may give wi11 be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God. Mayor Blewett Thank you. Tonight when you do speak, please give your name and address and also the organization, if any, that your represent. St<-n:.e olso that you have been sworn. If someone decides tat T on hat he,y /on1d tike to speak, the City Clerk wi11 ir'dividu^'i iy Qdt'rin-.ster the oath dt lhat time. The staff w111 now present evidence rid r-snmony in support of the Redevelopment Plan. Mr. Sexton Mr. Mayor, t.o b^gm the R^CCPSS we have with us tonight from Urban Projects, Ms. Aru'i Clf-ji'ens and Mr. Jerry Rogers. Urban Projects, Inc. has assisted many cities and Redevelopment Agencies in implementation of approximately one dozen of these programs dnd they have completed the formulation of this report. Ms. Ctemens The first thing that we need to cover tonight is the background of the proposed redevelopment project. As Council and Agency are aware, the City has adopted a General Plan. It calls for land usage in the area which is the subject of this proposed redevelopment o be commercial. Land usage is not such now. The adopted General Plan of the community is the basis for the redevelopment plan and it was with that in mind that this Redevelopment Plan has been prepared. Mr. Sexton Briefly, the idea of the history of this, as I'm sure you a11 know, the one time Baldwin Park Blvd. Redevelopment Plan, which begain in 1974, I believe. That project incorporated the South Baldwin Park Blvd. section. At that time it was invalidated in 1974 by the California Court of Appeals. Since then the basis for ourindusion was the South Baldwin Park Blvd. Area. The Plan that we're presenting here thi'i evening is completely and totally different from that plan. Ms. Clemens Chairman and Members of the Agency, the project area boundaries are shown on the large map located at the other end of the room and Mr. Raphiet wi11 point out the boundaries to you. They are generally Puente Avenue to the West and Garvey Avenue to the South and to the East. The project is located in the northeasterly intersection of the Puente and Merced Avenues. Those boundaries were selected for this proposed redevelopment project primarily because the land included within those areas was to unify the potential development as a whole and meet tests of what?? It is important that we review those tests of blight, but before doing so I would tike to briefly review what the Redevelopment Plan states. Generally the Redevelopment August 9, 1978 Page 2 PROCEDURE OATH STAFF MR. SEXTON MS. CLEMENS BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉMAdjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council August 9, l97» and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Page 3 Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency Plan itself does two things: It sets forth the authorities MS. CLEMENS and powers of the Redevelopment Anencv with respect to property within the effected boundaries. As such, it provides to the Redevelopment Agency authority to purchase property and, if necessary, to use its power of eminent domain. It empowers the Agency to relocate occupants within the project area who are displaced as a result of that acquisition and white author- izing that activity, also requires the departments involved that assist them in their monetary location benefits to provide such The Plan authorizes the Redevelopment Agency to incur costs in carrying out certain kinds F public improve- ments such as street improvements, improvements to which is why the Plan authorizes the Agency to se11 land which it has acquired and cleared for Redevelopment by private parties. Redevelopment by private parties under the Plan must occur in conformance with the land use regulations which are set forth by the Plan. The Redevelopment Plan now., which is the last page in the proposed plan, sets forth the land uses to be permitted in the project area. Those land uses are commercial uses. Text language of the Plan details what those uses night be. In this instance those uses are defined as generc'1 retail and service commercial uses, including among other uses, automobile dealer- ships and restaurants. As the Council/Agency are aware, from prior discussions before he two groups, it is the primary intent of this project to develop automobile d^lersl-ip uses. The importance of those uses will become norp ije^r when Mr. Rogers gives the firhmcini analysis of the p'-ojei-l Sc', basically, the Redevelopment Plan is setting for1h 1 he luth'^-itie^ of the Agency and restriction as to the use of the land. Now, very briefly, to turn to the question oi' tiu conditions within the project area, which is re'evr-ir': to the determination of blight, I refer you to the n'pori co he City Council included in your packet, which contains a tyng d?',ciisston ind description of those conditions both physical and economic-. Very briefly stated for the record, it is found that within the area conditions of blight exist. Approximately 75"/ of ril'l residential buildings within the area are in poor or fair conditions and evidence of deterioration has been occurring over the last three years as those figures are higher than the comparable Figures produced by a survey made three-years agn. Secondly, there h adequate provision for ventilation, light, sanitation, open space or recreational facilities. There are no recreational or open space facilities in the area. The area is at presently largely residential use. In addition, many of the uses within the project area are non-conforming to the City's adopted Zoning Ordinance, as primarily with respect to the inadequacy of parking for both R-I and Thirdly, the area is given to mixed or shifting Icind uses. In this proposed project area there is an inappropriate mixture of residential and commercial uses, with the former being incompdtable to the site, in part due to the proximity to the freeway and its projection to the adverse influences thereby. The second group of blighting conditions has less to do with physical state of the current uses within the project rind more to do with economics and economic blight. It is found that there is an economic dislocation of deterioration or disuse occurring within the project area. The finding is based upon a number of things, one of which is a good part of the land within the proposed project area is vacant. Most of the vacant land occurs in parcels which are inadequately platted. Parcels which are either abnormally elongated with minimal frontage upon public streets and inadequate a:cess thereto or parcels which are essentially landlocked. As a result of the subdivision pattern most of the area is unused and is not capable of use. Lots are subdivided in irregular forms and shapes. The platting of the area is inappropriate for proper development. Development is inhibited as a result of that platting. Further, your inadequate public improvements and facilities within the area. The street system for the proposed project area is inadequate, if not nonexistent. The area is quite large, running approximately a thousand feet east to west, Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉMAdjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency 800 feet north to south. There is no internal circulation system. Mayor Blewett Excuse me Ms. Clemens. Let the records so note that our colleague Mr. Aguitar arrived. Mr. Aguilar I would like to apologize for being late, but I had Mid Valley Manpower Consortium Meeting. Ms. Clemens In addition, the project area exhibits a prevalence of depreciated values, impaired investments and economic maladjustments. This is shown in the written report which is before theftgency and Council, which is introduced for the record, in terms of analysis of the project areas contribution to the City's tax base. That report shows that the area's contribution to the City in terms of property taxes is only approximately 1/2 of what one would expect within an area of this size, based on the City as a whole. Not only is the area's contribution to the tax base substandard for its size, but that contribution has been declining in recent years and the rate of increases in property values has been lower than that of the City as a whole, and finally that rate of increase is declining. The Community Redevelopment Law under which we are operating here says it does not stop the test of blight, it simply questions as to whether or not there are physical characteristics of blight or economic characteristics of blight. Also, it goes on essentially to ask the question as to whether or not those physical or economic conditions cause a burden on the community as a whole. In this particular instance the community's adopted General Plan calls for commercial use. It indicates what it expects to plan for income to the City by virtue of both property values and sates tax, which is not being realized at this time because the proposed project area is not developed to that use. Further, the question must be asked as to whether or not that burden, that lack of achievement of the community's goals, as expressed in the General Plan, can be reversed or eliminated by private enterprise acting alone. The documentation which you have before you and which you will enter into the record finds that it's highly unlikely that private enterprise acting alone can intact favorably that burden, primarily due to the land platting situation which I earlier described. As a result of those analysis, your staff and consultants have concluded that the finding of blight might be made. It is also important to this proceeding that we review definite elements of the documentation which you have in your hand Now, I will, at this time, review very briefly the Relocation Plan for this project. As the Agency is aware, the Redevelopment Plan requires that, prior to the time a redevelopment project is adopted, analysis be made of the relocation needs of any occupants which exist within the area and an assessment be made of the degree of difficulty which might be encountered in relocating those occupants. You have before you a Relocation Plan included in the Report to Council which does that. Very briefly, it is found that there are approximately 13 residential occupants in this project area, largelyof lower and moderate income, primarily the latter, that rental structure for the project area unit is basically comparable to the rental structures and housing through- out the rest of the community. It is not expected that residents wilt have difficulty in relocating. It is also found that there are approximately 10 businesses within the area and that with care in the relocation process, with particular attention upon the needs of the businesses in terms of resources of business, that businesses also can be successfully relocated. It should also be pointed out that both the Report to Council and the Redevelopment Plan itself permit the Redevelopment Agency to provide all required assistance both advisory and monitary to a11 persons intem'onally displaced by this project. At this time I would like to introduce Jerry Rogers of Urban Projects who will present the findings of the Agency's ability to build those projects. Mr. Rogers I am Jerry Rogers, Chairman, Urban Projects, Inc. I have been sworn. I will review very briefly the financial August 9, 1978 Page 4 AGUILAR ARRIVED 7:44 P.M. MS. CLEMENS MR. ROGERS Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉMAdjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency August 9, 1978 Page 5 feasibility of the project. The state law does require an* MR. ROGERS analysis of the financial feasibility and there are a number of approaches that can be made to this. Basically, the financial or economic process here is one in which the Agency will acquire land, some of it improved, some of it vacant, it will replatt the plan and sell that land to other parties thereby recouping some of the outlay, and they win incur either a profit or deficit, usually a deficit, because of the nature of the redevelopment process, which would then be financed in a variety of ways which I'll go into in just a minute. We have analyzed the cost of acquisition of this entire site as outlined on the diagram that's in front of you. These costs were based on appraisals which were made approximately a year to 18 months ago, outdated in some cases, plus our own estimates from our firm of cost of relocating the residences and clearing improvements off the property. It is important to bear in mind that we are buying some property which is improved here and not just vacant land. Our estimate of the cost of acquiring a11 the property in the redevelopment project is approximately 2 million 6, including the cost of relocation and the cost of demolition of existing improvements. The Agency would then enter into negotiations with new users. The intent here, while any type of commercial reuses are permissible, the intent here, as stated earlier, is to develop several automobile agencies on the property and possibly restaurants as well. This reuse plan is one that will be studied in more detail by the Agency Board, and specific contracts to re-sell the land to reusers win be subject to future hearings and are not the subject of the decision tonight. We estimate that for the automobile dealer and possible restaurant reuse the Agency should, be able to resell the entire site for approximately 1 million 1 hundred thousand dollars, closer to $1,200,000; this would be recouped. This difference between the recovered sale price and the cost of acquiring and demolishing and relocating of about 2 million 6 leaves us a net project cost of approximately 1 minion 4 for the entire project. Now, there are several ways in which the cost of the project can be rationalized. Under the California Law one of the primary financing methods is conmonly known as tax increment financing, a procedure in which the Redevelopment Agency can recoup the tax revenues based upon the increased valuation that will occur in this property from the date that the base is frozen, which would correspond with the adoption of the plan here tonight. Due to the results of passage of Proposition 13 at the June election, the revenues available through this method financing have been reduced from what they were prior to that time, but under the legislation recently passed in Sacramento to clarify any of the aspects of Proposition 13, at least for this year. the Redevelopment Agencies will be entitled to recoup the full 1% of market value equivalent from tax revenues that develop out of this particular project area. We have every reason to believe that the legislation being worked on for a permanent solution to this will probably contain about the same formula. Therefore, our assumption is that the tax increment flow will flow to the Redevelopment Agency from this project equal to approximately 1% of the new value added by the new improvements over the values existing today. In round numbers this wi11 amount to a tax increment flow of about 51 thousand dollars annually to the Redevelopment Agency, which could be used to help defray the net project cost. Now, commonly in the past Redevelopment Agencies have sold bonds; tax allocation bonds are based upon the increment flow, these were unique kind of debts to adapt to this instrument running only to the Redevelopment Agency, not a general obligation of the City. The market for these types of bonds, needless to say, has become somewhat fuzzy as a result of the election but we feel that with the clearing up of the legislation as has occurred at least this one year period and which we expect to be extended beyond, that the Agency probably will be able to sell tax obligation bonds in some manner in the future. It remains to be seen precicely Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉMAdjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency what those amounts will be. For the time being we would estimate that these tax increment flows, after discounting by approximately 2Q% to satisfy the need for housing requirements as mandated under the State law, the remaining 40 odd thousand dollars of increment flow would finance about 209 thousand dollars worth of tax allocation bonds. This would be one means of financing part of the 1.4 million dollar project cost. The Agency, or rather the City, was uniquely eligible for application to the Federal government for certain grant funds under the Urban Development Action Grant Program. It is sponsored by the Federal government. This is a program, demonstration type program, if you will, and the Federal government has encouraged those cities that met certain conditions, notably high unemployment and other economic characteristics which needed stimulation. Baldwin Park was one of the few cities in this area eligible for these types of grants. The City did apply in May of this year for such a grant and elected to apply the proceeds of such a grant, if approved, entirely to this Puente-Merced Redevelopment Project. They have received a tentative approval of this grant; it is tentative not and is subject to the project meeting certain conditions. It would appear those conditions can be met and it seems fairly sound and certain that the grant may be a potential source of funding in the amount of approximately 750 thousand dollars. A 750 thousand dollar grant, together with the funds which we believe can eventually be funded through the tax increment flows would amount to about a million dollars, and that would account for a major part of the net project costs, as mentioned earlier. The final analysis, however, for the justification of the project Is really rationalized through the sales tax revenues. The auto dealerships are very high generators of retail sales and, therefore, retail sales revenue for the city, retail sales tax revenues, and this would be a genuine good source of substantial income for the City because retail sales tax revenues for Baldwin Park have been relatively low in size of the City and low in comparison to other surrounding communities. We estimate that with the development of at least two dealerships on the property, plus some restaurant dwellings, and perhaps even without the restaurant development the sales tax revenues on the order o'? 350 to 390 thousand dollars annually would be developed through sales tax revenues. These, as you can see, plus the potential Federal grant, plus the funds available from tax increment financing would easily cover the project cost 1n the first year of complete operations. Even if the Federal grant were not available, or if the tax allocation bonds had not been sold for any reason, the sales tax revenue formula would be sufficient to amortize the net project cost of about 3 to 4 years. So, on that basis it appears it would be a very productive and economically feasible project. Many redevelopment projects that we analyze, which are adopted and carried out through tax increment financing are not paid off in less than 8 to 10 years, some of them much longer than that. So this does have the revenue generation potential to amortize itself much faster. Even if the Federal grant is not available, as I just mentioned, the sales tax revenue would pay the project off 1n 3 to 4 years. Converselly, if the sales tax revenue was not that high, the availability of the Federal grant perhaps even at a lower level than 750 thousand dollars applied for would pay the project off rather promptly. That sums up the financial feasibility study in short. Mayor Blewett Thank you Mr. Rogers. Mr. Sexton, in the absence of Mr. Kilgour would you give us a report of the recommendation of the Planning Commission. August 9, 1978 Page 6 MR. ROGERS Mr. Sexton Mr. Kilgour is on vacation this week. We have received correspondence from Planning Director Kilgour to Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency, dated August 2, 1978. I'll read a portion of that to you in part and quote The Planning Commission made a finding that the draft Puente-Merced Redevelopment Plan 1s In PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉMAdjourned Regular Meeting of me Baldwin KarK City Council August 9, 1978 and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Page 7 Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency conformance with the General Plan." End of quote. The members of that Planning Commission Meeting of June 14, 1978, having made an attachment to their report on the Puente-Merced Redevelopment Plan. Mayor Blewett Mr. Raphiet suppose you please explain the Project Area Committee study and their recommendations. Bill Raphiel Mr. Chairman, members of the Agency Board. The Project RAPHIEL Area Committee, established by the Agency Board several months ago, PROJ. AREA consisted of the home owners or property owners within the project COMMITTEE area and one other member that did not live within the project area. EXHIBIT D There were a series of meetings held and the Project Area Committee does recommend that the Agency Board/City Council approve the Redevelopment Plan. I have before me a letter addressed to the City Council/Agency Board with their recommendation. Honorable Mayor and members of the City Council. The Puente-Merced Project Area Committee has reviewed the Puente-Merced Redevelopment Plan and related documents and wish to advise you of our approval. We heartily endorse the plan's objectives for eliminating blight, the creation of jobs, and expanding the City's revenue base. We recommend adoption of the Redevelopment Plan at your public hearing scheduled for August 9, 1978. Sincerely, Joe Angelo, Chairman, Project Area Committee." I would like to enter this letter into the records as evidence and also I would like to indicate that the minutes of the various meetings are contained within the Report to the City Council. Mayor Blewett Thank you Mr. Raphiel, Ms. Clemens would you proceed. Ms. Clemens Yes, Mr. Chairman. The Agency is in receipt of a report from MS. CLEMENS the County of Los Angeles Fiscal Review Committee and is included in the record as an attachment to the Report to the City Council from the Redevelop- ment Agency. It is also important to review very briefly as a part of these proceedings the fact that the Redevelopment Agency has adopted a set of Owner Participation Rules for the proposed Puente-Merced project. Those rules are in the packet which the City Council has tonight. Very generally, those rules are designed to provide for reasonable preferences to participate in the project by owners of property, operators of businesses within the project area Those opportunities are necessarily limited by such factors as the need to reparcelize the land which lies in the project area. Also important as a part of the hearing is to review briefly the Environmental Impact Report which has been prepared on the proposed Redevelopment Plan. It is important to note that the Environmental Impact Report for the project is on the Plan. The proposed Redevelopment Plan is the project in the Environmental Impact Report standards. The draft report is in the set of documents which Council and Agency has before it as part of the record. The Environmental Impact Report contains an assessment of the existing environment in some detail. The Environmental Impact Report finds that there are no significant effects upon the environment as a result of the carrying out of the proposed redevelopment project planned. It should be noted that the primary effect, that our potential effect has to do with the relocation of the number of individuals in the project area. It should also be noted that the Relocation Plan, which accompanies these documents deals with that problem. The conclusion of the Environmental Impact Report is that the project is found not to cause significant irreversable environmental changes. It is also important to be pointing out that should the actual development, which occurs eventually within the project area, differ substantially from that called for in the Redevelopment Plan, additions would need to be made to the Environmental Impact Report which is before you tonight. Thank you very much. Ms. Clemens Mr. Chairman, if there are no other presentations from the EXHIBIT A & B staff, it is appropriate at this time to enter into the record certain exhibits which have been referred to. Exhibit A is the Report to the City Council from the Redevelopment Agency, with all attachments; Exhibit B are some photographs of physical conditions within the project area which Mr. Raphiel might hand around to the Councilmen at this time. Mayor Blewett The documents and materials just described are entered into the record. Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉMAdjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council August 9, 1978 and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Page 8 Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency Mr. Ftandrick Mr. Mayor, the City Clerk has in her possession, as does the Secretary of this Agency, copies of that full report and the letter referred to by the City Manager dated August 2, 1978. Mayor Btewett Any written communications to be entered into the record at this time also? Mr. Sexton Mr. Mayor, at this point in time it is stated that two written communications, summarizing for you. County of Los Angeles and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California as affected taxing agencies of the Puent^-Merced Redevelopment Project have elected to receive allocations oF taxes attributable to any increases in the District's rates which occur after the tax year in which the Ordinance adopting the Plan becomes effective. We have attached certified copies of Resolutions No. 1 and 2 from RESOLUTION 1 & 2 the County of Los Angeles and Resolution No. 7747 from the COUNTY WATER DISTkrCT Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. That wilt & METROPOLITAN WATER be Exhibit C. DISTRICT Mr. Ftandrick Also Mr. Mayor, under written communications, the letter from the Project Area Committee read by Mr. Raphiel should be Marked D and accepted and the letter from the Fiscal Review Committee referred to by Ms. Clemens, July 12, should be next in order and entered into the record. Mayor Blewett We will now hear any statements or testimony from the public relative to the Redevelopment Plan. Paul Geiger, Attorney, Denny's Restaurants, 14256 E. Firestone, PAUL GEIGER, ATTORNEY Downey. Denny's has a restaurant in this proposed project area. DENNY'S RESTAURANT We disagree with Ms. Clemens and her Urban Planning Group. This area is not blighted in our opinion. She went through a list stating basically that 75% of the residential area was for that there were no recreational facilities, there is no parking facilities, and no vehicular traffic movement within the area. That is because 30 acres of the 59 acres within the area are vacant. It's our opinion the area is not blighted, there is only a few stores, 13 houses, a brand new Standard Gas Station, a liquor store and a few other stores and a 10 year old Denny's restaurant, which has sates of about 6 hundred thousand dollars a year, which is pretty good for a Denny's Contrary to what you said, Mr. Mayor, it was in 1977 when the Court of Appeals held that the project area, which then included an extra 53 acres in South Baldwin Park was not blighted. In that regard I want to quote from the court case, if I may, it said The Court stated that the land in both sites that means Puente-Merced and South Baldwin Park) is assessed at a low valuation, and perhaps could be put to more productive uses, but no substantial evidence suggests the existence of blight at either site, except that parcetization at the Puente-Merced area is irregular and private development appropriate to a street way location has not yet occurred. There is little evidence of deteriorating structures, none in the South Baldwin Park site, and no evidence of physical dangers or health hazards to the inhabitants of either site". Now the holding of the Court in this, the opinion is the whole area is not blighted, yet the City is trying to do the same thing now that it tost in court on last year. I know the court case commenced 3 years ago, but the area can't have changed that much in 3 years. It is still mostly vacant land and 13 houses. I think the City is kind of hoping the plan wilt survive this time through court by not including South Baldwin Park area; however, the City's motives this time are exactly the same as they were last time, they want to receive increased tax revenues to the City on which are generated by bigger and newer commercial users. Now, in this regard I would like to quote from the same Appellate Court decision, It is clear that the expectation of economic improvement and the prospect of speculative gain by themselves furnishes an insufficient basis for use of the powers of redevelopment under Community Redevelop- ment Law. A prerequisite to the use of the Act is the showing of Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉM Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency the existence of blight and blight in the context of this case can only be found in the inability of private enterprise to redevelop the area. On this record this inability can only be premised on the irregular reparcilization of land which under the Community Redevelopment Law is one of the characteristics of blight and on the absence of substantial commercial development, thus far, as part of the Puente-Merced site. Certainly there is no evidence to show that the project area is either a social or economic liability except in the sense that it might be made more profitable for the City than it now is." Again a court quote of another redevelopment case called Redevelopment Agency vs Hayes where the court said; Public agencies and courts both should be wary of the use of the CRA act unless there Is a situation where the blight is such that It constitutes a real hindrance to the development of the city and cannot be eliminated or improved without public assistance. It never can be used just because the public agency considers that it can make a better use of planning of an area than its present use or plan." In summary. Gentlemen, I'm here as a representative of Denny's to tell you that if you decide to adopt this plan we are going to sue the City on the same grounds which you lost In the Appellate Court last year, and I don't think the circumstances In the area have changed that much in the last two years to where you won't lose the same court battle again. Thank you. Mr. Flandrick Mr. Mayor, if I may, I think it would be appropriate, subject to your desires in the matter, to ask our consultants to reply and comment on the factual potential. Perhaps It would be a little easier that each speak for them- selves. Jerry Rogers We made our blight evaluation as a first step In looking at this project which, of course, we looked at for the first time. I have not been associated with any previous analyis of City information. We are aware of the court case and so on, that the Gentleman just referred to, and I might point out in that connection, of course, that the commitments he was alluding to stated that the court decision where 1n reference to the blight evidence which was presented to the court, and I believe that there was a statement In that opinion that variable evidence of blight was presented In the reports which were being reviewed at the time. That's an Important point because we have made our own independent assessment of the blighted conditions and therefore, our conclusions were based upon our own investigation not any previous investigation and there is a different set of facts than the Gentleman was referring to. So the facts and I'll have Ms* Clemens go over some of the evidence very briefly that led us to the blight conclusions. Ms. Clemens Very briefly, beginning with evidence of physical blight, an exterior structural survey was conducted by the firm of Urban Projects Inc. In 1978 and January of this year, with respect to a11 structures within the proposed project area. The findings in that survey briefly were that there were 9 residential structures of primary nature, not structures, of which 2 seems to be in average condition, 4 In fair condition; and 3 In poor condition. No structures were rated excellent or good. There were 4 primary commercial structures within the proposed project area of which 3 could be rated as good and one as average* In 1975, as part of the preliminary appraisal process, the Redevelopment Agency had commissioned appraisals of the same property. The appraiser In this report have opinions of conditions. Those opinions for the same 9 primary residential structures. Included a classification of two structures good; one as average, 3 as fair and one as poor and two not rated. In terms of the commercial structures within the proposed project area a total Continued) August 9, 1978 Page 9 JERRY ROGERS MS. CLEMENS BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉM and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Page 10 Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency of 4; two were rated as good in the previous survey and two were MS. CLEMENS not rated at all. Those figures show that physical conditions probably have deteriorated since 75. I think what Mr. Rogers stated with respect to prior court case is important and should be recognized by all parties. The judge in that decision was dealing with evidence which had been presented during the Redevelopment Plan hearing process of 1975, evidence which was presented to the court. We are dealing here today with different evidence in 1978. I don't think there is a relationship between the judge's comments that evidence of three years ago and the evidence which is before the Council; and findings of blight based on physical conditions do not stop simply with the condition of structures, they also deal with such matters as open space and recreational space as defined by law; and as previously stated, it is found that open space and recreational facilities are unavailable within the project area as related to current use of a good part of the project area as residential. In addition a lot of the uses within the project area we find caused by uses primarily in terms of parking, but not zoned in terms of parking. The report which is before the City Council in written form goes into detail relative to blight some of it existing, some are element of physical blight. Finally, the element of physical blight is the character of land uses in compatability to each other. In this project area it is clear that there is an incompatable mixture of uses. Going on to the point of outdated land, which has to do with out economic of blight, it is our opinion that the presence of vacant areas within the project area is not of blight. It is important, however, with respect to this project where approximately 50% of the land is vacant to recognize that most of that vacant land is not in parcels which are totally vacant, most of the vacant land occurs on improved parcels, but parcels which are platted in such a manner as they are primarily undevelopable. That in our judgement is an indication of economic dislocation and misuse or under- utilization of land. That again is related to the provisions in the law, finding of blight based on irregular subdivision of land. We talked about that previously in the hearing. Finally, the inadequacy of the circulation system for the area, which again is related to the undevetopability of the interior of the site and whether or not the parcels which are being vacant as a whole or as portions of improved parcels because the circulation system and public improvement of utilities within the area are inadequate to the area. The area is inhibited in its development. Finally, the economics of blight also is related to evidence of depreciated value, impaired investment and economic maladjustment. The impaired investment is evidenced by the vacant land and by the irregular platting of the land and that in turn presents an economic maladjustment to the community. In turn that economic maladjustment presents an economic burden to the community; that economic burden should be alleviated or reversed. The function of the finding of blight is that if that reversal or alleviation of that economic burden could be carried out by private enterprise acting alone, the area would not become blighted. However, if that burden can not reasonably be expected to be alleviated or reversed by private enterprise acting alone, then the finding of blight presents the intervention of the public conmjnity development of the land so as to revert the economic burden on the community. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mayor Blewett Does anyone else wish to testify? Gerald Estow, 14256 E. Firestone Blvd., La Mirada. CA 90637 I GERALD ESTOW, have been sworn. I'm with Denny's Restaurant. I'm director DENNY'S RESTAURANT of Property Management. We operate the restaurant at 14619 East Garvey Boulevard as our Denny's Restaurant 145. It is a franchise restaurant operated by Mr. Ken Coles and we're here to object to these proceedings because it would very probably deprive our franchisee of his livelihood and terminate our business, which has been operating since June of 1967 or July of 1967. We operate there and employ approximately 40 or 45 people. Our sales in that unit have increased between fiscal year 77 and fiscal Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉM Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council August 9, 1978 and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Page 11 Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency year 78 by 20%. With all do respect to the consultants, they GERALD ESTOW, have a lot of very fine jargon, such as economic maladjustment, DENNY'S RESTAURANT and things of that sort which frankly I don't understand. Reviewing the property as just a reasonable businessman of the community I don't think these things make any sense whatsoever. When you talk about inadequate circulation it would seem that you could build a road. You have the rights to condemnation for the process to put additional roadways in; you talked about a lack of recreation and certainly you have a right to build a park. I'm not quite certain that automobile agencies are the highest uses for that land. I know that most communities try to exclude them. Certainly it would seem to me that shopping centers on a parcel that size would be the primary objective of the community in terms of generating higher retail sales and in general the marketing of this land; and I go back to a conversation I had with Mr. Raphiel recently, and I put some questions to him and he was honest and candid in his answers to me I'm sure. It seems that if you really wanted automobile agencies why is it that General Motors wasn't contacted or Chrysler or Ford. This seems to be sort of an ill-conceived project. It's one that was certainly shot down by the court very recently, I've read through that material and it has been commented on by our Counsel, I think one thing that I would like to comment on and put in the record here Is that while the State law possibly does not require that tenants be contacted, it would seem that since the consultants and the staff involved here are contemplating restaurant uses, and since we are, in fact, operating a restaurant there now, that we would have been contacted to determine what our future intentions were with respect to the operation of a restaurant facility in that location. That would just seem good business. I'm not going to comnent on each and every objection that I have, the information was put forth this evening. I think Mr. Geiger did a good job in that and with that I'm going to terminate my comments. Mayor Blewett Ms. Clemens, would you make reference to the provisions in the law for relocation? Ms. Clemens Yes Mr. Chairman. The Community Redevelopment Law MS. CLEMENS as well as the California Relocation Assistance Act provides that where businesses are displaced as a result of public acquisitions, certain relocation advisory services and monetary assistance is available to those displaced businesses In order to alleviate hardships which otherwise might exist. Like for a specific with respect to kind of services required those are extensive, will Include referrals, sites, special analysis of feasible alternative sites, continuing assistance In depth on Individualized basis to each and every business, by project, to assure the feasible relocation of that business with suitable replacement site. In addition, the law requires that displacement agencies provide to such businesses relocation payments which are designed to compensate for all the costs of moving personal property from the site of acquisition to replacement site. Or alternatively a certain flat rate site relocation payment, which are sometimes taken by businesses in 11eu of payment by a compilation of moving expenses which tentative payments based on the net earnings of the business and the preceeding the acquisition activity. The latter payment for businesses and the size of the restaurant probably is not applicable and has a maximum of $10,000.00. More salient to this discussion 1s the Intent of this Agency to the statement that is made 1n its Redevelopment Plan to fully provide services and a11 payments and I emphasize that the computation of the moving expenses, which Is the movement of all personal property withheld from sale, stock, fixtures and equipment. It is fully compensible and there Is no Mayor Blewett Is there any further testimony? Bertha Regus 5013 Cutler, Baldwin Park. I have been sworn In. BERTHA REGUS I think that the 2 fellows previous pretty well covered everything 1n general. However, the Queen's Lodge Is 1n that area and I'm Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉM 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉM Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council August 9, 1978 and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors Page 13 Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency Mayor Blewett Is there any further oral testimony? Josephine Taytor 3146 1/2 Puente. I have not been sworn in. JOSEPHINE TAYLOR City Clerk swears in Ms. Taylor) I'm a resident in that area and exterior of the houses are just as bad as the interior of the houses. The plumbing fixtures are shot. I live in a house that has termites and the landlords wilt not do anything to fix it up. They are just as bad inside as outside and I realty feet that....well, I don't have the vocabulary of the others..... Mayor Blewett You're getting your point across very well. Ms. Taylor Fields are a fire hazard. I understand that we have had two fires. Every year I call City Hall to get fields plowed, things tike that. They are a trash collector taken out. These are $150,000 a year revenues for our city; ones that are going to help our city not tear It down, money that we need. For so many years Baldwin Park has been refusing Industry and this has realty hurt us. It's brought Baldwin Park Into the position it is now. Thank you. Mayor Blewett Any further testimony? Bernard S. Jetlnowicz 3550 McLaughtin Avenue. Los Angeles. B. S. JELINOWICZ CA 90066. I am part owner of retail store on Garvey Blvd. Me object to the CRA. Me have been there for 17 years and we have a fu11 time office. My Partner, we have quite a bit of sales tax and taxes we pay to the City and I would tike to know one thing, our store Is In the same Island as Standard Gas Station. Why is It that Standard Gas Station can stay there and we have to...you want to move us? That's one thing we would like to know and another thing, If we did not have the constant talk of the CRA for years and years we could have bu11t. My partner and I, myself, and a lot of private people. We could have brought here some kind of a nice shopping center In the area, and according to the conversation you always have, with threats with the CRA that we have to move out In 3 or 6 months, that's reason nothing was ever done there. Even so, we Improved our part of the section there and therefore, I object to the CRA. Mayor Blewett Ms. demons, would you 11ke to address yourself to the questions that are raised? Aron Clemens I think that It Is important to go back to basic MS. CLEMENS provisions of the proposed Redevelopment Plan. The proposed plan Is catling for land usage In the proposed project area to be commercial. The wording of the Pfan defines them as, among others, automobile and restaurant uses. It does also define the terms as general retail uses. What I'm trying to point out 1s that while It has been discussed over the past six months that the designed development hope of the Redevelopment Agency that perhaps most of the site would be redeveloped to automobile dealerships uses. The way the Redevelop- ment Plan, which Is what Is before you tonight, not automobile dealerships. Is structured, retail commercial uses may be permitted. I think that's Important to Mr. Jellnowtcz's concern because what Is being acted upon tonight is not a decision that every existing business or every existing commercial activity within the project area be removed, but being acted upon tonight 1s a Redevelopment Plan to guide development within the project area, not a specific planned redevelopment which calls for the acquisition and relocation clearance of a11 existing retail properties. Mayor Blewett Is there any additional oral testimony? Mr. Izell It is my understanding of this that anybody that has a business in that area wilt be given consideration in order to buy the land to build a new building If they so wish. Mr. Flandrick That is absolutely correct. Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉMAdjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council August 9, 1978 and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors Page 14 Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency Mr. Geiger May I address the Council on that point, Mr. Mayor? I would like to quote from the minutes of the Project Area Committee meeting dated April 13, 1978 where Ms. Clemens expressed themselves, as well as Bill Raphiel and Mr. Glass, who is a CRA Advisory Commission Chairman...... Mayor Blewett I have to make a correction. There is no CRA Advisory Commission at a11 any more. It was dissolved by this Council. What was the date of the meeting? Mr. Geiger April 13, 1978. Mayor Blewett At that time there was a CRA Advisory Commission, but at this time there is none. Mr. Geiger But I would like to quote though from the minutes of that meeting. It was stated by Mr. Raphiet that the intended use for the Puente-Merced area was limited to two car dealer- ships and one restaurant. Mr. Glass asked if the Denny's restaurant was the restaurant in question and Ms. Clemens answered no". It seems that it has already been pro-determined that Denny's, even though it's a tenant in the area right now, isn't going to be a restaurant once this project is under way. Thank you. Mr. Flandrick I think it is incumbent at this point, since there NO PREDETERMINATION has been an allegation, there has been a pre-judgement as to what OF USE uses may be involved. Mr. Raphiel is entitled to his opinion; Ms. demons is entitled to her opinion; the only opinion that counts is those people who have a vote and the 5 of you sitting here and I think it's incumbent at this point to say for the records that there has been no determination concerning any use on this area if the plan is adopted. Like I say, it's incorrect and somebody should correct it. Mr. White I, speaking for one member of both the Agency and the Council, have certainty not made a determination. I reviewed these plans and I think very dearly in all of them it states that we may exercise the power of eminent domain. This area and the area that is occupied by Denny's is included in the Redevelopment Plan; however, there has been no intent to sieze Denny's by anybody on this Council at this time. Not that maybe sometime down the road that that will be a consideration, at that time Denny's wi11 certainty be contacted and permitted to be a part of that consideration. Mr. Qeratd Estow I would tike to make further comment, my name GERALD ESTOW is Gerald Estow. The consultants talked earlier about incompatible uses of commercial property. I don't feet, and I think I'm a reasonable businessman, that it is a compatible use to put restaurants with automobile agencies. I put it to the consultants that if they were to survey the Greater Los Angeles/Orange County areas they would find few, if any, such uses that were planned in advance. There may be one or two where this takes place, but certainty it is not something of preference that is, I think, on the surface an incompatible use of commercial property and certainly replacing a coffee shop type of business, which again went back to those minutes that was referenced there in some area, that they were attempting to put in a dinner house or other type of restaurant user, and that further, common sense of the area of incompatible use, a fine dinner house doesn't necessarily go next to a body shop. Mayor Btewett One question of you, sir. It is just a matter of personal interest on my part, your position with Denny's as Mr. Estow I'm Director of Property Management. Mayor Blewett Are you in charge of acquisition? Mr. Estow No Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉMAdjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency Mayor Blewett IsDenny'sor has Denny's ever participated, either currently or in the past, in any redevelopment projects? Mr. Estow I'm not certain, I can't answer that, Mayor Blewett I would certainly like you to find the answer to that question and if you would send it to the Board. I would be most interested in it. Thank you. Is there any further oral testimony? I will now close the public hearing. Is there any testimony by the Council/ Agency members? Mr. White I have some questions of our staff. How long has our General Plan called for this particular segment to be commercial? Mr. Sexton The current existing General Plan was adopted in 1974. Prior to that I imagine most of the site was zoned commercial, Mr. Flandrick It would be my recollection, I think in 1961 the first Plan was adopted. I believe Mr. White This area has been designated a commercial area for some 18 years. Mr. Flandrick Based on memory, yes sir. Mr. White And in that time private enterprise has not been able to develop other than the Denny's Restaurant and, of course, those that are in existance. Mr. Blewett I would liki? to point out something, that since my involvement with the City has been since 1970 and I've had over the years heavy involvement with that property in the sense that....and we have been interested in the develop- ment of that property. There has been numerous attempts to accumulate that property to do something with it and by numerous developers. All attempts have failed because of the accumulation problems. Any further questions by Agency members? If there are no further questions I now entertain a motion to adopt the resolution approving the Environmental Impact Report. He read by title Resolution 78-82. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK. CALIFORNIA. CERTIFYING THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ON THE PROPOSED PUENTE-MERCED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WAIVE FURTHER READING AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 78-82 M/S/C/: AGUILAR/IZELL. Roll Call. There were no objections. 00- Mayor Blewett I now entertain a motion from the Council to adopt the Redevelopment Plan for the Puente-Merced Redevelopment Project. He read by title Ordinance No. 780. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BALDWIN PARK APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PUENTE- MERCED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WAIVE FURTHER READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 780 M/S/C: AGUILAR/MC NEILL. Roll Call. There were no objections INTRODUCE ORDINANCE NO. 780 M/S/C: AGUILAR/MC NEILL Roll Call. There were no objections. 00- ContinuedJ_ August 9. 1978 Page 15 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED RESOLUTION 78-82 WAIVE FURTHER READING AND ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 78-82 ORDINANCE NO. 780 WAIVE FURTHER READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 780 INTRODUCE ORDINANCE NO. 780 BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 1978 08 09 CC MIN;¢f4ÉM Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Baldwin Park City Council and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency Mayor Blewett If there are no further questions from the Agency/Council, I entertain a motion for Adjournment of the Council/Agency meeting. Mr. White I would tike to pose one comment. The adoption of this plan tonight in my judgement was the adoption of a very good idea. If it turns out that sometime down the road a piece it puts one business, that changes the nature of one business, perhaps moves it and it does well for the people of Bladwin Park everybody will benefit from it. We have not relocated by our action tonight a single business. We think we have taken a step to remove blight and more adequately develop a major commercial section of our town. We hope that we have hurt no one; we win do whatever we can to avoid that and I will promise that. I wish it could have been done entirety privately; entirely without any other consideration. As I pointed out, I have watched for 19 years and there is an eye sore and vacancies and blighted dwellings in a major commercial section of our City. The Denny's restaurant is a very successful business, I'm aware of that, and the liquor store, are not redeeming to the extent that we have to sit still for the next 19 years and wait for something to happen. Mayor Blewett I would tike to very much thank a11 of you who came and participated in this hearing this eveing. We are very much interested in the solution of the blight problem that exists on that property. It's incredible and it has been horrible for a long time. I think interestingly the only person that really the only person who lives in the project who spoke, spoke of the incredible blight and I think that was a very interesting point resettabte to this Council. Mr. Izell Mayor Blewett, I would tike to meet Denny's lawyer some day with a request for a new dinner house in that area. Mayor Blewett Incidentally, with your property man. back there, we would like very much to talk to him about keeping Denny's in Baldwin Park because we are very interested in Denny*s and we have a very super market here for their quality product. 00- AT 8:52 P.M. THE MEETING ADJOURNED. M/S/C: WHITE/AGUILAR There were no objections. 00- August 9, 1978 Page 16 8:52 P.M. MEETING ADJOURNED PHILIP R. SEXTON, SECRETARY APPROVED: fe?^ /^ f^/ Date of Distribution to Council: October 13, 1978 Date of Distribution to Departments: October 13, 1978 BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06 Adjourned Regular Meeting of theBaldwin Park City Council August 9, 1978 and Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors, Page 12 Baldwin Park Redevelopment Agency going to object to the CRA. There's a Denny's Restaurant there BERTHA REGUS that's in the area and it's been there for quite some time, and I can't see including those businesses or taking them out to replace another restaurant just simply because it would be by Queen's Lodge. Now, I'm going to object to the EIR. There is many things that are missing in the EIR. It's not complete, and another thing, I object to our sales tax being used for that area to pay the man's debt; the peoples debt going in there. Aside from that, I hear jobs being mentioned. We11 that's a specialized business, automobile agencies, they're going to have their own mechanics and the chances are a hundred to one they are going to bring their own mechanics with them. I have to concur with the other two gentlemen, an automobile agency at that place in our city certainty wilt not beautify our City at all. So, aside from that, when the three judges made the decision that they call it a pie in the sky" and it's just the decision of how many pieces you want to slice it in. Our city is now building and getting off to a good start and I certainty am going to object to it going in this direction. We must build confidence in the city and build it with the people that are here, not trying to bring other people in out of the state, and I hope you people consider it because I talked to so many people and that is there most concern, they don't want CRA in that area. Thank you. Mayor Btewett Mrs. Regus you are a citizen of the City of Baldwin Park, but you do not reside in the project area? Mrs. Regus Right, I stiff have a standing as you wetf know and that's been decided by the court because my taxes go to a portion to that so..... Mayor Blewett but you do not reside in the project area. Mrs. Regus No, but that has nothing to do with that, I can object to it and I have standing. Mayor Btewett You certainly do, you are a citizen. Mrs. Regus Right and there is a gas station in there and Queen's Lodge. Mayor Blewett May I point out to you that neither the gas station or the Queen's Lodge are included in the project area. Mrs. Regus They aren't? Mayor Blewett They are not. Mrs. Regus And I read some place where they plan to eliminate Denny's and that's an established business for quite some time, and a new business certainly will have to have time to build; so, I hope you people should take this into consideration and I'm going to object to it. Thank you. Mayor Blewett Is there any further testimony? Mr. Henry Last 5021 Banna Avenue, Covina, CA 91722. May name is Henry Last. I'm one of the businessmen located in the Puente- Merced area. I do believe it is unfair to take away a business from one private party and replacing with another private party when we are larger in size. For 17 years we have made an effort to make a living for ourselves and our employees and we are not in a position to start anew; it's unfair. I'm asking to have the right to stay in business in the same area. Thank you. HENRY LAST Mr. Ftandrick Mr. Chairman, if I may, the Agency and the Council have adopted the Owner Participation Rules as was pointed out earlier and there isn't any proposal at this point and time to physically relocate anyone. The point is that those rules are Continued) BIB] 37656-U01 1978-U02 08-U02 09-U02 CC-U02 MIN-U02 LI1-U03 FO9591-U03 FO9594-U03 DO9688-U03 C4-U03 MINUTES1-U03 2/4/2003-U04 ROBIN-U04 REGULAR-U05 SESSION-U05 CITY-U06 COUNCIL-U06