Loading...
HA1980/08/19t 80-47 ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY August 19, 1980, 1:00 P, M. Council Chamber Anaheim City Hall PRESENT: AUT'HOKPIY MEMBERS: Overholt, Kaywood, Bay, Roth and Seymour ABSENT: AUTHORITY PIEMBF,RS: None PRESENT: CITY MANAGER: William 0. 'Talley C I'1Y ATTORNEY: William P. Iloplci ns SECRETARY: Linda D. Roberts EXI'CETIVE llIREC'fOR: Norman J. Priest HOUSING MANAGER: Lisa Stipkovich Chairman Seymour called the regular meeting of the Anaheim Housing Authority to order at 1:11 P,hi. MINUTES: On motion by Mrs. Kaywood, seconded by Mr. Roth, minutes of the Anaheim Housing Authority regular meeting held August 5, 1980, were approved. MOTION CARRIED. FINANCIAL DEMANDS AGAINST THE ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY in the amount of $82.67, in accordance with the 1980-81 Budget, were approved. RECESS: On motion by Mr. Bay, seconded by Mr. Roth, the Housing Authority recessed to 1:30 P.M, for possible discussion of status report concerning future development aad land uses of surplus school sites. MOTION CARRIED. (1:12 P,M,) AFTER RECESS: Chairman Seymour reconvened the Anaheim Housing Authority meeting at 5:00 P,M., all Authority Members being present, 177/155: STATUS REPORT OF FREMONT AND APOLLO JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS: Recom- mendation by the City Planning Commission that the City Council send a letter to the Anaheim Union High School District Board indicating the City's concerns relative to housingfor low and moderate income families and the Planning Commission's willingness to participate in a joint meet- ing with the School Board, the Community Redevelopment Commission and the Housing Commission, to discuss future development and land uses of surplus school sites (continued from meetings of August 5 and 12, 1980). Mayor/Chairman Seymour asked staff to make a brief presentation on the course of action recormnended, Ms. Susan Schick, Redevelopment Manager, first briefed the Council on reports dated August 15, 1980 to the City Manager/Housing Authority from the Executive Director of Community Development, Norm Priest, "Intent to Purchase Surplus School Site"--one regarding the Fremont Junior High School site and the other the Apollo Junior High School site and recom- mending that the Anaheim Housing Authority approve a letter of intent to purchase both surplus school sites. They met with the City.Attorney's 80-48 ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY AUGUST 19 1980 1:00 P,M. off-ice, Parks and Recreation and the Planning Department to come up with a series of recommendations that may be appropriate. To briefly summarize, - they were trying to take advantage of an opportunity that the School Dis- trict presented by using the surplus property for a couple of possible uses. One would he to attempt to accommodate recreation potential on the sites. There might be a possibility to provide Senior Citizen facilities on the Apollo School site and possibly some cultural art facilities on the Fremont site. In addition, the Housing Authority involvement and the staff recommendation. for the Housing Authority involvement was to try to pursue an opportunity to provide additional housing resources in Anaheim, includ- ing a percentage of those units being developed and what they defined as affordable housing, affordable being housing opportunities that could be made to cater to the individual i.n the City with an income anywhere between 80% to 120% of the median income. In order to do so, they were recommend- ing that the Housing Authority submit a letter of intent of their interest in purchasing the Apollo and Fremont School sites on two conditions. One would be that on the Fremont site, they enter into negotiations on what would actually be the Fair Market Value of the property and on the Apollo site, the offer would be based on the stated value in the School District notice of $3,030,000. In addition, they would be telling the School District if they were to proceed with a firm offer for the property, they would do so only on the condition that they would be able to select and enter into a contract for the sale and purchase of the property with the developer to be selected in the 60-day time period set up. The other condition would be that the sale °' " of land from the tIousing Authority to the developer would be used to close any escrow that may be entered into between the Housing Authority and the School District. The 60-day time period would end approximately October 15, 1980. During that time, they would be required to send out a request for proposals--the Housing Authority--to any qualified, interested housing developer and ask them to put together a proposal for the property involved ici the two sites. The proposal would require the developer to front all the capital costs of the Housing Authority so that the Housing Authority would merely be the pass-through agency between the developer and the School District. The involvement of the Housing Authority would be to try *_o assure that a portion of the housing be developed in the affordable housing costs range. The proposal would state that they would like res- ponses with a 45% requirement for affordable housing, However, in order to accommodate the Parks & Recreation interest in pursuing recreation uses on the cwo sites, that they also ask the developers to convey a portion of each of the sites for recreation purposes. In the case of Fremont, they were talking about the possible conveyance of approximately 4 acres which would include approximately 2 acres and parking and at least the main auditorium facing Lincoln Avenue. At Apollo, they were talking about the possible conveyance of two buildings to the City and about one and a half acres of parking supporting that use. In return for that conveyance, if the Council felt that was a feasible thing to do, the Housing Authority would then negotiate with the developer to possibly reduce the 45% afford- able requirement if that developer could show the Authority that the financial feasibility of that conveyance to the City adversely affected the overall development program so that it no longer made any sense to proceed. 80-49 ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY, AUGUST 19, 1980 1:00 P M. In addition, in order to begin the necessary work to put together a housing package in such a short time period, they were also recommending that the Council initiate a General Plan Amendment that would consider alternate parks & recreation and low-to-medium residential uses on both the Apollo and Fremont School sites. They believed if they initiated the General Plan Amendment, as well as proceed to work with an EIR consultant to do an EIR analysis, by the end of 60 days (October 15), at which point they should have developer proposals and hopefully selected one, they would have sufficient information to be able to enter into a commitment with that developer on what his housing proposal would be were the Housing Authority to act as the instrument to transfer the property from the School District to a private developer. In addition, they were also requesting that the Housing Authority authorize staff to proceed with submitting a request for proposal to developers interested in the property. She also clarified with regard to the motion on the environmental assess- ments that needed to be done, in order to get the developer decent direction and to talk about the possibilities for the type of housing uses that may be most appropriate on the site, they wanted to proceed with the EIR as soon as possible, the recommendation being that the Community Development Director and the Planning Director proceed to select and negotiate a contract with an EIR consultant immediately and then return to the Council with that contract for execution. 'f hat was the basic proposal. In summary, they had an opportunity and a chance to proceed with that opportunity without committing themselves irrevocably during the 60-day time period and thus, they could accomplish two goals--possible park and recreation usage and the possibility of securing affordable housing in Anaheim. In answer to a line of questioning posed by Authority/Council Members Kay- wood, Bay, and Overholt, Ms, Schick relayed the following: If they could not come to a conclusion on a Fair Market Value and sales agreement within the 60-day time period, the School District had submitted a notice stating they would proceed to advertise the site publicly. Relative to the possible influx of children as a result of affordable housing and the question as to where they would go to school, that was something the EIR would address at a minimum. In addition, the School District in coming to a determination on the need for the sites, any EIK they had done, that issue had also been addressed. It was something they could look into and report on to the Council prior to any final selection of a developer. Further, the affordable housing requirement would come in a series of housing types and use. It would be a mix, not all three and four bedrooms, and it would not be their intent to seek such proposals, They had a method to control the school population if the EIR showed it to be a prob- lem. They would not limit children, but the private developer would be able to provide a mix of housing units. She reiterated, she would be sur- prised if a developer came back with all units as two, three and four bedrooms in which there would be children based on the mix of units already existing in the neighborhoods. 'Phe risk factor, if the Council took the necessary actions today, would be the cost of the EIR, but it would be a very minimal risk. 30-50 ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHOKITY AUGUST 19. 1980. 1:00 P M Planning Director Thompson already pointed out in their discussion that the school site would be used for some type of residential and park and recreation use and thus they were investing in a future review of the situ- ation earlier than normal. It was estimated that the cost of the EIR for the two sites would be approximately $32,000 to $35,000. The other factor would be the time expended by staff; the notice of intent was simply a requirement in the Education Code to make the School District aware that there was interest from public entities to sit down and negotiate and purchase that property, and it did not represent a legal commitment by the City. They wanted to sit down and negotiate with the School District on the Fremont value, but felt that the price on Apollo was Fair Market Value. The one unknown in the process as previously mentioned was that although they could ask the developer to submit a proposal with housing units with at least 45% of [hose affordable with the right to negotiate on the reduction of that if the conveyance of the property adversely affected his financial proforma, they might be asking developers for too much because they were aware there was an interest from the cultural arts group in the Fremont site. It appeared in discussions with the Parks & Recreation staff that in order to accommodate the cultural arts group and their interest in the physical buildings on the Fremont site and to provide a minimum parking standard, they were talking about a possible conveyance of four acres. In addition, the developer had to demolish those heavy school buildings before he could gain an effective use of the property, A very minimum requirement would have to be 25% for affordable housing, otherwise, the Housing Authority would have no business being involved if it were less than that. _-_. Councilman/Authority Member Bay asked to hear from Mr. Ruth relative to the plan just described, putting i.t into operation and thereby ending up with what they wanted, how would they proceed from that point. Mr. James Ruth, Deputy City Manager, explained that staff had more work to do in terms of assessing the potential of the two sites. They explored Apollo in terms of whether they ever wanted it as a park site and said, "no". They recognized, however, that there was a tremendous need for senior citizen facilities in the City and although that site was in the westerly portion amenai>le to the approach, they would negotiate with the City of Buena Park and Cypress to see if they could get a three-party agreement to share in the cost of that facility because it would accommo- date more than Anaheim seniors, thus keeping cost at a minimum. At Fremont, he had discussed the matter with Mr. Ray Campbell and certain members of the Cultural Arts Foundation and the estimate on the maintenance, if they were to acquire all the facilities they were asking for, would be $126,000 a year. Currently, the City was paying approximately $30,000 a year for the Horace Mann School on indoor and outdoor maintenance. The Foundation had not made any decision on giving up the Horace Mann School, but if so, that 530,000 could he applied toward a new center for mainten- ance and operation. Mr. Herb I.eo performed a study at one of the meetings where he indicated based on the greater flexibility of the facilities, _ greater potentials for rentals existed and, therefore, the Foundation could generate substantially more income than at the Horace Mann School which would offset some of the operational costs. 80-51 ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY, AUGUST 19, 1980, 1:00 P, M. In terms of rehabilitation, they had explored that with Norm Priest relative to getting some Community Development Block Grant money that might assist and also exploring grants. They felt they could show bene- fit to the Project Area and thus felt that would be a source of funding. The $126,000 dollar estimate was based on five buildings. He did not have the estimate on just the main front building, but Mr. John Roche, Facilities Maintenance Superintendent, had toured the facility and spent considerable time on the matter and he was certain that maintenance costs were broken down by buildings. Councilman/Authority Member Bay stated that he would like to know the difference between the maintenance cost for five buildings as opposed to the one main building. Councilwoman/Authority Member Kaywood asked if the parking area was included in the Fremont site; Mr. Ruth answered that it was going to be difficult for the developer but that it was a necessity to have the parking. The Mayor/Chairman asked to hear from any member of the public who wished to speak to the matter. Although no one indicated a desire to speak, a show of hands revealed that there were nine people present in favor of the staff recommendation, Councilman/Authority Member Bay asked Mr. Campbell, who was in the Chamber audience, if it was the intent of the Foundation, if Fremont were made available, to give up the Horace Mann School. *1r. Campbell deferred to the President of the Foundation, Marguerite Lee. Mrs, Lee stated that she did not think the situation was discussed, and assumed that they would give up the Ilorace Mann School when they moved in to the much-needed larger quarters. Discussion then followed between Councilman/Authority Member Bay and Mr. Campbell relative to the space needs of the Foundation, specifically the need for five buildings vs. one, and also maintenance cost per square footage. Mr, Campbell also explained that relative to rehabilitation, the City need not become involved in that aspect because he felt they would get enough grants from the Foundation and possibly the government to take care of rehabilitation over a protracted period of time. Mayor/Chairman Seymour stated that they were going to need something in black and white, a written proposal from the Cultural Arts Foundation that would outline everything in detail Uefore they could build that into their final decision-making process. Councilman/Authority Member Overholt reported that people called him this week and even those who had some doubts as to whether the Fremont facility would provide what they really wanted, now seemed to be for the project because they felt all kinds of flexibilities were built in. No one was negative and the Foundation should be complimented for forging ahead, and they should proceed with considerable confidence that people were behind them. 80-~2 ANAHEIM HOUSING AUTHORITY AUGUST 19 1980 1:00 P,M. The Mayor/Chairman cautioned, however, that there were many unknowns as of _. ._ this time. Before concluding, Mrs. Lee asked what the chances might be of their being the tenant and the City the landlord. They had been self-supporting at the Cultural Arts Center and were using every inch of their present space and had to turn people down everyday, They were in the hopes that the City could be of help. Ms. Schick then confirmed in answer to a question posed that at the Fremont site they estimated that they would require two acres of parking or parking for 240 or 260 cars. She then asked the Council if they were intending to have the letters of intent submitted by the housing Authority; the Mayor/ Chairman answered "yes". MOTION: On motion Uy Councilwoman/Authority Member Kaywood, seconded by Councilman/Authority Member Overholt, the Housing Authority was authorized to submit a letter of intent to the Anaheim Union High School District to purchase two surplus school sites, Fremont Junior High School and Apollo Junior High School and authorizing the Chairman and Secretary to execute said letters. MOTION CARRIED. City Clerk Linda Roberts asked as a point of clarification if the motion included all of staff's recommendations including initiating the General Plan Amendment; the Mayor answered "yes". Later in the meeting, Councilman/Authority Member Overholt referred to the letter received from the Anaheim Union lIigh School District regarding Trident Junior High School as another possible surplus school site. He presumed that at some time they would be hearing whether or not there was any possible use for that faci.liCV as well. Having been on. the Anaheim Ci[y School Board when the Horace Mann School issue was raised, it seemed that was a beneficial arrangement for the City and the School District and if there were surplus properties, that was a goad way to look at those properties. He looked forward to seeing if there was any possibility relative to Trident also. Councilwoman/Authority Member moved to adjourn, Councilman/Authority Member Overholt seconded the motion. MOTION CARRIED. ADJOURNED: 5:40 P, M. LINDA D. ROBERTS, SECRETARY