Loading...
ARA1987-083RESOLUTION NO. 87R -83 \ = A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM APPROVING A REPRESENTATIVE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE IN THE KATELLA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA WHEREAS, The Planning Commission of the City of Anaheim has heretofore _- established the boundaries for the Katella Redevelopment ?reject Area and approved and adopted a Preliminary Plan formulated for the redevelopment of the project area; and WHEREAS, in October and November, 1986, the published several announcements in the Anaheim Bu Register and Community Register soliciting letters of Area residential tenants, residential owner - occupants, representatives of community organizations to serve Committee; and Redevelopment Acency letin Orance County interest from Project business persons and on the Project area WHEREAS, 40 persons responded to the announcements and submitted letters of interest, and the Community Redevelopment Commission and the City Council have given due consideration to all persons submitting said letters. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Anaheim, as follows: i. The Katella Redevelopment Project Area Committee (PAC) cons s t ing of the residential tenants, residential owner occupants, business persons and representatives of community organizations named on the list of PAC members attached 'hereto, labeled Exhibit 'A' and by this reference mnade a =art hereof, is hereby approved as a representative Project Area Committee. -- w 2. . The Community Redevelopment Commission, the Redevelopment Acency and the Redevelopment staff. are directed to consult with and obtain the advice of the Project Area Committee concerning those policy . w: ^.ica de _ with the planning and provision of residential facilities or replacement housing for those to be displaced by Project activities and other matters which affect the residents of the Project Area while preparing a Redevelopment Plan and for a period of 'three years after adoption of the Plan. THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION the City of Anaheim this 17th is approved and adopted by the City Council of day of March 1987. 0503C -o_, -�_' /- d EXHIB - *A" KA':ELLA PROJECT AREA PAC SZIZCTION OWNER /OCCUPANT CATEGOR° Grea Beaubien Mark Botich _ Williar Edwards Deborah Vacs EXISTING ORGANIZATIONS CATEGORY: _ Charles �enninc Irene Jennina r Walter JOvice Lynda Pascoe BUSINESS Otv'NER /REPRESENTATIVE CATEGORY: Paul Bostwick Peter Ganahl Robert Kuznik Charles Marshall TENANT C ATEGORY . er_� Gocc�n Pau_ Leak Ancelina Vevna Marlaina Anne We"S_- Bosde_ 0512C 03/05/87 CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, LEONORA N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 87R -83 was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of the City Council of the City of Anaheim held on the 17th day of March, 1987, by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Pickler, Hunter, Kaywood and Bay NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None VACANCY: COUNCIL MEMBERS: One AND I FURTHER certify that the Mayor of the City of Anaheim signed said Resolution No. 87R -83 on the 17th day of March, 1987. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the City of Anaheim this 17th day of March, 1987. CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAE:r M (SEAL) ° I, LEONORA N. SOHL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 87R -83 duly passed and adopted by the Anaheim City Council on March 17, 1987. CITY CLERK OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM Katz Hol I is Attachment 2 to Part VII PAC meeting agendas and minutes A G Z N D A L'ATELLA PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE Mav 20, 1987 1:00 P.M. SUNKIST BRANCH LIBRARY 901 S. Sunkist (Between Ball and Lincoln) Phone: 956 -3503 I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. STAFF REPORTS A. REDEVELOP*�ENT PLAN - REVIEW, DISCUSSION, AND REQUEST FOR ACTION AUTHORIZING A FAVORABLE REPORT ON REDEVELOPMENT PLAN �- B. OWNER PARTICIPATION RULES - REVIEW, DISCUSSION AND REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF PROPOSED RULES FOR OWNER PARTICIPATION. IV. SET NEXT MEETING V. PUBLIC COMMENT AND QUESTION /ANSWER PERIOD VI. ADJOURNMENT CALL TO ORDER ` Meeting was called to order by Chairman Bostwick at 7:10 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Corrections to the minutes of May 6, 1987 were noted: William Edwards should have had an excused absence for that meeting; Bob Kuznik's name was incorrect. Mr. Edwards made a motion to adopt the minutes of May 6, 1987 as corrected. The motion was seconded by Ms. Vagts. MOTION CARRIED. - REVIEW AND DISCUSS A. Redevelopment Plan - Mr. Zur Schmiede reviewed and discussed the Redevelopment Plan w; *h the Committee, answering questions raised by committee members. In response to a question from Mrs. Jennings regarding the low to moderate income housing included in the Plan and whether that included senior housing, Mr. Zur Schmiede indicated that by law 20% of the Agency tax increment funds are required to be set aside for low to moderate income housing, which also includes low /mod income seniors. KATELLA PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE MINUTES May 20, 1987 MEMBERS PRESENT: Charles Jennings Irene Jennings Bob Kuznik Paul Bostwick Marlaina Weisl Lynda Pascoe Deborah Vagts Terri Goggin Mark Botich William Edwards Charles Marshall MEMBERS ABSENT: Walter Joyce (EXCUSED) MEMBERS ABSENT: Peter Ganahl Angelina Veyna (UNEXCUSED) Paul Lepak Greg Beaubien STAFF PRESENT: Norm Priest, Executive Director Lisa Stipkovich, Assistant Executive Director Rob Zur Schmiede, Project Planner Lucy Yeager, Senior Planner M Lance Garber, Legal Counsel Allan Robertson, Katz Hollis Consultant Debbie Williams, Senior Secretary GUESTS: June McIntyre, Don McIntyre Photography Selwyn Ramsay, Ramsay Engineering Co. CALL TO ORDER ` Meeting was called to order by Chairman Bostwick at 7:10 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Corrections to the minutes of May 6, 1987 were noted: William Edwards should have had an excused absence for that meeting; Bob Kuznik's name was incorrect. Mr. Edwards made a motion to adopt the minutes of May 6, 1987 as corrected. The motion was seconded by Ms. Vagts. MOTION CARRIED. - REVIEW AND DISCUSS A. Redevelopment Plan - Mr. Zur Schmiede reviewed and discussed the Redevelopment Plan w; *h the Committee, answering questions raised by committee members. In response to a question from Mrs. Jennings regarding the low to moderate income housing included in the Plan and whether that included senior housing, Mr. Zur Schmiede indicated that by law 20% of the Agency tax increment funds are required to be set aside for low to moderate income housing, which also includes low /mod income seniors. Project Area Committee Minutes - May 20, 1987 Page 2 Mr. Botich raised a question on the issue of displacement. Mr. Zur Schmiede indicated that displacees would be relocated once comparable living quarters are located. Mr. Priest added that any displaced individual or business is entitled to relocation benefits. After questions and discussion, it was the consensus of the Committee to recommend that underground utility projects undertaken under the plan include residential as well as commercial areas. Mr. Edwards made a motion that the entire Redevelopment Project Area contain underground utility lines, seconded by Ms. Vagts. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Jennings questioned the qualifications necessary to obtain rehabilitation assistance. Ms. Stipkovich responded that there are no special qualifications or guidelines proposed for rehabilitation assistance at the present time, and that a program would be developed for this project in the future and presented to the Project Area Committee. A question was raised by Mr. Kuznik regarding the relocation of businesses and the City's ability to retain those businesses in Anaheim. Mr. Zur Schmiede explained that the selection of a relocation site rests with the individual businessman. It is up to the businessman to decide whether to remain in Anaheim. Mr. Priest added the City works with local realtors to attempt to attain a suitable site for relocation within Anaheim. Mr. Kuznik expressed his interest in keeping businesses within Anaheim city limits. Ms. Stipkovich mentioned that at a later date a Relocation Plan would be prepared for the Committee's consideration. The issue of goals of the keep traffic ease traffic direct freew, recreational traffic was discussed Redevelopment Project off the freeways. Va flow, such as one -way ay access into parking areas. in length. Mr. Priest indicated one of the is to improve surface streets in order to rious alternatives are being looked at to streets and a people mover, as well as structures and major commercial A discussion was held regarding affordable housing within the project and the requirements of the Redevelopment law on percentages of affordable housing required in the project. Ms. Weisl expressed a concern about the number of parks proposed for the project. She hoped that additional open spaces might be included as play areas for children, and also mentioned the possibility of a number of mini -- parks. Mr. Botich aaued he felt more space should be allocated for recreational areas. Mr. Zur Schmiede pointed out that a 10 -acre park is proposed for the project, but that a specific site had not yet been identified. The Committee recommended that the list of proposed park facilities be expanded to allow for parks throughout the project area. Project Area Committee Minutes - May 20, 1987 Page 3 After discussion, the Committee indicated the need to expand street widening and water system improvements on Harbor Boulevard south to the south city limits. Staff stated they would include that recommendation in the Committee's report to the Planning and Redevelopment Commissions. Mr. Kuznik asked that the issue of accommodation of facilities and /or equipment of mass transportation modes be incorporated into the goals and objectives of the project. Staff indicated this would be included in the report. Mr. Marshall questioned whether criteria for signage would be enforced in the Project Area, and added he would like more restrictions placed on sign usage than presently exist. Mr. Kuznik made a motion to recommend approval of the Redevelopment Plan with the following recommendations: a) that utility undergrounding projects be expanded to include residential areas; b) sign control should be strengthened; c) mass transportation should be emphasized in the plan; d) water systems and street widening extensions along Harbor Boulevard should extend to the south city limits; e) more areas should be designated for recreation; and f) the Agency should implement an incentive program to retain businesses to be relocated. The motion was seconded by Mr. Edwards. MOTION CARRIED. B. Owner Participation Rules - After discussion and review, Mr. Marshall moved to adopt the Owner Participation Rules as presented, seconded by Ms. Vagts. MOTION CARRIED. NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING June 3, 1987 PUBLIC COMMENT June McIntyre, owner of an Anaheim business, commented that she wants to see the corridors of Anaheim beautified and is in favor of the Redevelopment Project. Selwyn Ramsay, a business owner in Anaheim, also expressed his favorable comments on the work of the Committee. Chairman Bostwick commented that Greg Beaubien has resigned from the Committee and that a new committee member will need to be appointed. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Bostwick adjour«u the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DEBBIE WILLIAMS Senior Secretary 021OW A G E N D A KATELLA PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE May 6, 1987 7:00 P.M. SUNKIST BRANCH LIBRARY 901 S. Sunkist (Between Ball and Lincoln) Phone: 956 -3503 ----------------------------------------- - - - - -- I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. REVIEW AND ADOPT BYLAWS IV. ELECTION OF OFFICERS V. REVIEW AND DISCUSS 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF REDEVELOPMENT PLAN /PRELIMINARY REPORT 2. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN 3. • PRELIMINARY REPORT 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT VI. SET NEXT MEETING VII. PUBLIC COMMENT AND QUESTION /ANSWER PERIOD VIII. ADJOURNMENT y KATELLA PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE MINUTES May 6, 1987 :MEMBERS PRESENT: Charles Marshall Lynda Pascoe Charles Jennings Irene Jennings Paul Bostwick Mark Botich Deborah Vagts Marlaina Weisl MEMBERS ABSENT (EXCUSED): Peter Ganahl Paul Lepak Terri Goggin Angelina Veyna MEMBERS ABSENT (UNEXCUSED): Greg Beaubien William Edwards Paul Kuznik STAFF PRESENT: Lisa Stipkovich, Assistant Executive Director Rob Zur Schmiede, Project Planner Lance Garber, Legal Counsel Allan Robertson, Katz Hollis Consultant w_ OTHERS: Bob Doty, Redevelopment Commissioner ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- CALL TO ORDER: Meeting was called to order at 7:20 PM without a quorum present. REVIEW AND DISCUSS: Redevelopment Agency Project Planner Rob Zur Schmiede reviewed and discussed "- the following documents: Executive Summary Summarizes main features of proposed Redevelopment Plan and the Preliminary Report on the Proposed plan. Redevelopment Plan The Plan will function as an implementation tool after the Project is approved. The Plan lists proposed public improvement projects and serves as a framework within which development will occur. It includes a land use plan and establishes development controls. The Plan sets limits on tax increment financing and sets forth overall project costs. Preliminary Report on the Plan Primarily written for other taxing agencies in the project area. The Redevelopment Agency is required to demonstrate the financial feasibility of the project as well as the need for the project. This - document provides a great deal of backup material regarding the Plan. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Provides a detailed description of what the project will do. It describes the project location, and describes anticipated activities and their impact. Mr. Zur Schmiede referred to the land use map and discussed proposed land uses described on the map. After the EIR is certified, it will be referenced as development projects are approved under .-. the Plan. Supplemental environmental documentation may be required for certain individual projects. Assistant Executive Director Lisa Stipkovich stated that there is a 45 -day comment period on the EIR. On May 12, 1987, the Redevelopment Commission and Redevelopment Agency will hold a public hearing to receive comments on the EIR. The PAC may comment on the EIR and if they chose, prepare a report on the EIR to the Redevelopment Agency. Redevelopment Agency Counsel, Lance Garber explained the process of plan adoption and schedule. He also explained tax increment financing. A redevel- opment project is financed through property taxes. The allocation of property taxes to the various entities is altered and the Redevelopment Agency receives the increment of the property taxes that result from new development in the area once the project is adopted. A quorum was achieved at 7:30 PM. With a quorum present, the meeting was called to order by Chairperson Bostwick. During the fiscal review period, the various taxing agencies have to demonstrate what percentage of the increased property taxes they need in order to operate -� or more precisely, how the project is a detriment to the taxing agency. Ms Stipkovich read the list of taxing agencies in the project area. Owner participation was explained and discussed by Lance Garber. Mr. Zur Schmiede indicated he would bring a'Project Alpha newsletter which discussed owner participation to the PAC's next meeting. Mr. Garber discussed the recent Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) ruling with reference to Project Area Committees and disclosure of economic interest. An opinion has been rendered and his law firm, Weiser, Kane, Ballmer and Merkman, is reviewing the decision and should be able to present a full report at the next meeting. There being no further discussion on Item 465 of the Agenda, the Chairman proceeded to the remaining agenda items. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: A motion wag made by Mr. Jennings to approve minutes of April 15, 1987; seconded by Mrs. Jennings. Motion carried unanimously. BY -LAWS: A motion was made by Mr. Jennings to approve the By -laws; seconded by Mrs. Jennings. Approved unanimously. - ELEC'iION OF OFFICERS: Mr. Jennings moved that Paul Bostwick be elected Chairperson. Mrs. Jennings seconded. Approved unanimously. There being no nominations for Vice Chair- person, the Chairperson called for volunteers. Deborah Vagts volunteered and was approved unanimously. NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING: In accordance with the By -laws, the meetings will be held on the first and third Wednesday of every month at the Sunkist Library at 7:00 PM. The next meeting will be on May 20, 1987. Chairperson Bostwick recommended that everyone review the project documents and make a list of comments and questions for discussion at the next meeting. There was a discussion of the EIR Hearing and the role of the Redevelopment Commission, PAC and Agency. Commissioner Doty from the Redevelopment Commission commented on the relation- ship of the Commission and PAC. ADJOURNMENT: �- Motion was made to adjourn, motion seconded and carred. Meeting was adjourned by Chairperson Bostwick at 8:55 PM. Respectfully sub itted, Lisa Stipkovich /jjk 0004K A G E N D A KATELLA PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE RECEI ZD �— WEDNESDAY, APRIL 15, 1987 APR 1 31987 7:00 P.M. YAM HOLLIS, COREN s ASSOCIATES SUNKIST LIBRARY BRANCH 901 S. Sunkist (between Ball and Lincoln) Phone: 956 -3501 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES ELECTION OF TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON IV. REVIEW AND ADOPT BYLAWS V. ELECTION OF OFFICERS VI. PROJECT UPDATE VII. ESTABLISHMENT OF MEETING SCHEDULE VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT AND QUESTION /ANSWER PERIOD IX. ADJOURNMENT 0004K KATELLA PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE MINUTES APRIL 15, 1987 MEMBERS PRESENT: Greg Beaubien Paul Bostwick Mark Botich William Edwards r Terri Goggin Charles Jennings Irene Jennings Deborah Vagts Marlaina Weisl MEMBERS ABSENT (EXCUSED) Robert Kuznik Charles Marshall Angelina Veyna MEMBERS ABSENT (UNEXCUSED) ' Ganahl Lynda Pascoe Paul Lepak STAFF PRESENT: Lisa Stipkovich, Assistant Executive Director Rob Zur Schmiede, Project Planner Lance Garber, Legal Counsel Kathy Leist, Secretary An agenda for the meeting of April 15, 1987 was posted at the Counci Chambers on April 10, 1987 at 4:30 pm. CALL TO ORDER Meeting was called to order at 7:25 pm by Lisa Stipkovich. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion was made by Paul Bostwick to approve minutes of April 1, 1987 seconded by Greg Beaubien; motion carried with the following changes a requested by William Edwards and Greg Beaubien: (1) William Edwards t be shown as "member present" and (2) Gary Beaubien's name corrected t Greg Beaubien. The approved minutes have been so corrected. ELECTION OF TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON At this time Ms Stipkovich requested that PAC select a temporar Chairperson or that a PAC member volunteer for this position. Pau Bostwick volunteered to be temporary Chairperson until the officia elections take place. REVIEW AND ADOPTION OF BYLAWS It was agreed by PAC that the Bylaws should reflect meetings Will bf held on the first and third Wednesdays of each month; location to b( Sunkist Branch Library, 901 South Sunkist, Anaheim, at 7:00 pm. During a discussion on PAC membership requirements, PAC was informe( that officers are elected for a one year term; PAC itself is require( (as stated in. the Bylaws) for three years after the adoption of th, Redevelopment Plan. Ms Stipkovich advised that, according to thi Bylaws, should a member resign or become ineligible for PAC membership the City Council votes on the new member who has been ranked an selected from the reserve list or through the recruitment process. Article II, Section 201. PAC MEMBERSHIP - following a discussion o attendance requirements, it was proposed by PAC to change the wordin to read as follows: "Membership shall be terminated by resignation, loss o eligibility, or three (3) unexcused absences in a fiscal vear It was agreed that an "unexcused absence" is when a PAC member does no contact the PAC Secretary or other staff member (at 533 -8750) and le them know they cannot attend the current PAC meeting. At the beginnin of each meeting, the PAC Secretary will advise the PAC of members wh have called or written and have excused absences. Ms Stipkovich then advised that PAC member, Walter Joyce, Existin Organization representative will no longer be a PAC member due t illness. Following the above discussion, it was noted that since there is proposed change to the Bylaws, they cannot be adopted until the nex PAC meeting as all PAC members must receive seven (7) days writte notice of the proposed change before they can be adopted. `- DISCUSSION - IMPACT OF BROWN ACT ON PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE Agency Counsel, Lance Garber summarized the possible impact the Brow Act may have on Project Area Committees. As no court has ruled on i yet, it is not clear how PAC will be affected. He further advised tha at present we are posting the Agenda showing items to be discussed a the next scheduled meeting 72 hours before the meeting as required b the Act and are using a liberal interpretation. ELECTION OF OFFICERS PAC was advised that elections should be postponed until all PA members have received a seven (7) day written notice of the propose Bylaws change and the Bylaws are adopted by a majority of PAC members. DISCUSSION - FAIR POLI'T'ICAL PRACTICES ACT Mr. Garber explained that the Fair Political Practices Commissicn reversed a ten year old decision and now the Fair Political Practices does apply to Project Area Committees, however, its effect will not be fully known until May when a written opinion will be released. He further advised that the Act may require PAC members to complete a Statement of Economic Interest (Form 730) disclosing finarcia- interests they may have in Anaheim. PAC will be informed in more detail after the opinion is reviewed. PROJECT UPDATE Rob Zur Schmiede indicated that Preliminary Report and the Redevelopment Plan will be ready for review by PAC at the next _ scheduled meeting if approved by the Community Redevelopment Commissior on Wednesday, April 22, 1987. There was a brief discussion wherein Mr. Zur Schmiede summarized the EIR process and advised the EIR will not be ready for PAC until the Redevelopment Plan and the Preliminary Report have been reviewed. At this time, Mr. Zur Schmiede showed a slide presentation depictinc the objectives of the Katella Redevelopment Plan in the City of Anahei: to be accomplished over a 35 year period. A general discussion followed the slide presentation regarding th Blight and problems in the area and the type of financing the projec and the various improvements planned within the project area. NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING It was agreed to schedule the next meeting for Wednesday, May 6, 1987 7:00 pm at the Sunkist Branch Library. ADJOURNMENT Motion was made to adjourn, motion seconded and carried. -- Meeting was adjourned by temporary chairperson, Mr. Paul Bostwick 9:00 pm. Respectfully submitted, K. Leist AGENDA PROJECT AREA Cd.4MITTEE - 3AT_LLA PROJECT -EDNESDAY, APRIL 1, 198 7:30 P.M. MA ::7 LIBRARY, 500 NEST BROADWAY r, ROLL .CALL AND SELF :NTRODUCT :ONS BY PAC MEMBERS AND STAFF (C:RCULATE AND COMPLETE PHONE NUMBER CARDS) ::. STAFF REPORT: A. OR_IENTA_:ON =0 PAC RESPONS :BILIT: -S B. UPDATE ON STATUS OF A ELLA PROD -C_ C. DISCUSS :ON DF - OCUMENTS TO BE REV: -54ED : 1. SC EDCLE OF ADOPTION 2. PR- TI :M:NARY rROjECT REPORT 4. PROPOSED BYLAWS : OR ?AC D, VIDEO. REDE'r'LOPMENT, A CALIFORN:A SUCCESS STORY :.I. SELEC TON 0: 0 ?F :C :RS (CHAIRPERSON A.ND V:Cr C?A:R) :7. :S:?.BL:S M=NT OF MEE_:NG SCHEDULE PUBL:C CoMM7Z;T AND QUES 7 0N /ANSWER P -R:OD V:. AJjOCRNM— r- FATELLA ?RO.;EC= ?.RE:, -C C:v GATEGORE Gre- Seau�iea xarx Bcc:c:: «i __ _ a^, 'cua: -s Decorah '.acts EY =STING ORGANIZAT:ONS CATEGORY Caar_es .;enning :ene .Ienninc Walter Joyce L✓nca Pascoe BCS:`JESS OWNER /REPRESENTAT: CATEGORY: P au_ Bost::iz:c 2st�: Gana^_ Rccert 3uzni{ char-es mars a__ TENANT CATEGORY: _?_ _ _ Gocc _.. =.--u 05_:C 00 /O5 /S7 l,... CEIVTD APR 13 1987 KATZ. HOLLIS. cOREN a ASSOCIATES KATELLA PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE MINUTES w April 1, 1987 MEMBERS PRESENT: Gary Beaubien, Owner /Occupant Paul Bostwick, Business Owner (Midway Mobile) Mark Botich, Owner /Occupant Peter Ganahl, Busineses Owner (Ganahl Lumber) Terri Goggin, Tenant Charles Jennings, Existing Organization _ (South Anaheim Neighborhood Council) Irene Jennings, Existing Organization (South Anaheim Neighborhood Council) Paul Lepak, Tenant Lynda Pascoe, Existing Organization (Guinn Elementary PTA) Deborah Vagts, Owner /Occupant -- Angelina Veyna, Tenant Marlaina Weisl, Tenant MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Joyce, Existing Organization (AARP) Robert Kuznik, Business Owner (Jaycox Disposal) Charles Marshall, Business Owner (Mr. Stox ) STAFF PRESENT: Norman Priest, Executive Director, Community Development and Planning Lisa Stipkovich, Assistant Executive Director Rob Zur Schmiede, Project Planner Lucy Yeager, Senior Planner Kathy Leist, Secretary OTHERS: Lance Garber, Legal Counsel for Agency Al Robertson, Consultant from Katz Hollis Martha Nessel, Consultant from Katz Hollis m- Call Meeting to Order Norman Priest, Executive Director of Community Development and Planning, called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. and introduced himself advising that Community Development and Planning Department includes the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency. Mr. Priest then read a small section of the Redevelopment Law which states the reasons for a PAC and its duties. Introduction of Staff and PAC Members Mr. Priest introduced the Redevelopment Agency staff, legal counsel, and consultants who will be working closely with PAC (see Staff Present and Others Present above). Redevelopment Commissioners Renner and Anthony, who were in the audience, were also introduced. Katella Project Area Committee Minutes for 4/1/87 Page 2 At this time the PAC members were asked to introduce themselves indicating which group they represented (See Members Present above). Update on Status of Katella Project Following the above introductions, a large map depicting the - boundaries of the project area was brought forward for everyone to see. Mr. Priest advised this is a very large area by redevelopment standards and includes the following land uses: industrial, residential, commercial and commercial /recreational. He further explained that the project is designed to meet the needs of these areas and is not a clearance project but an improvement project. The programs which are planned for the different areas were summarized as follows: Improve traffic flow in areas changing from industrial to commercial use; increase parking facilities in Stadium and Convention Center area; improve housing in the Citron Neighborhood Area and create more park facilities; upgrade the Jefferey -Lynn neighborhood to reverse the trend of blight, crime and health problems; upgrade the South Anaheim Neighborhood (Ponderosa Park area). Mr. Priest advised that the Convention Center (although not a part of -- the Redevelopment Agency program) is going ahead with their expansion plans and that Disneyland is also planning to expand their facilities. - He explained that if the Redevelopment Plan is adopted, the Agency proposes to finance the Katella Project through a procedure called "tax increment financing ". This procedure allows the Agency to take tax revenue from new development within the project area and then return it back into the area to assist in funding the programs described above; there are no property taxes taken from any existing tax base. At this time there was a brief question and answer period wherein staff answered questions asked by PAC and members of the audience. Mr. Priest advised the Redevelopment Law requires that the first 20% of tax increment funds received must be set aside to improve housing needs. This is accomplished either through new housing or rehabilitation activities. He further explained that Redevelopment funds are less restrictive as to usage than the Federal CDBG funds; thus, the Redevelopment funds may be more useful to the neighborhood areas. Katella Project Area Committee Minutes for 4/1/87 Page 3 1r. Priest gave out two phone numbers to call for information or .auestions' regarding the Katella Project: Rob Zur Schmiede - 533 -8750 or Norman Priest - 999 -5164. He then advised that the Agency would like to have the Redevelopment Plan adopted by mid -July so the tax increment process can begin as soon as possible; this may require one or two extra PAC meetings in the beginning in order to be on schedule. He indicated that PAC should be thinking about electing a Chairperson and Vice Chairperson either at this meetings or the next scheduled meeting. Discussion of Documents to be Reviewed by PAC Rob Zur Schmiede then introduced himself and handed out a matrix of the documents to be reviewed by PAC in the Redevelopment Project Adoption Process and their projected submittal dates. The documents are: Redevelopment Plan; Preliminary Project Report, Environmental Impact Report; Owner Participation and Preferences Rules; and Commission Report to City Council on Proposed Redevelopment Plan. Following the above discussion, Lisa Stipkovich referred to the agenda item "Proposed Bylaws for PAC" and advised that staff is working on a draft of the bylaws and will send this to PAC for their review before the next meeting. - Video Presentation The video tape entitled, "A California Succes Story ", was then shown which depicted the success of redevelopment projects in California over the past 30 years and explained the tax increment process. A brief question and answer period followed the video presentation "- wherein it was noted that Anaheim high school and elementary school district officials had been contacted with regard to changes in the community that may impact their schools and staff will contact other school district officials on this matter and work closely with them throughout the project. Election of Officers (Chairperson and Vice Chair) Mr. Priest then informed PAC that it was important for them to elect a Chairperson and Vice Chairperson either tonight or at the next meeting. It was agreed by PAC to wait until the next meeting so they . ould get to know each other better. Set Next Meeting Date Following a discussion on meeting dates, it was agreed that PAC would meet the first and third Wednesday of each month in the Main Library* at 7:30; the next meeting will be held on Wednesday, April 15, 1987. *Due to a scheduling conflict, please note that the meetings will now - be held at Sunkist Branch Library, 901 So. Sunkist (between Ball and Lincoln); Phone: 956 -3501. Katella Project Area Committee Minutes for 4/1/87 �. Page 4 Public Comment and Question /Answer Period Commissioner Renner requested to speak from the audience and indicated to PAC the importance of good public relations with people impacted by the redevelopment project and encouraged PAC members to keep the people informed of redevelopment plans and to contact staff if they need help in answering any questions. Ad iournment There being no further items to discuss, N. Priest, as Acting Chairperson, ajourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Katherine Leist Secretary katella KatzHollis Part VIII. REPORT REQUIRED BY SECTION 21151 OF PUBLIC RESOURCES CORE (PROJECT .- pbieff -1- ................ .................... .. ....... ..... . .............. . ...... ...... . IMP A draft environmental impact report (Draft EIR) was prepared by the Commission and is currently being circulated for public review and comment. The review period runs through June 8, 1987. On May 12, 1987 a duly noticed joint public hearing was held by the Commission and Redevelopment Agency on the Draft EIR. A copy of the Final EIR will be submitted separately to the City Council for addition to this Report to City Council. (VIII -1) Katz Hol l i s Part IX. REPORT OF COUNTY FISCAL OFFICER The Orange County Auditor - Controller, as the fiscal officer charged with the responsibility of allocating tax increment funds under Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law (CRL), has issued his report dated December 15, 1986 on Project Area and taxing agency taxable valuations and tax revenues. The Project Area base year taxable values reported by the Auditor - Controller in his December 15 report do not include values for the property assessed by the State Board of Equalization (SBE). A copy of SBE's report of base year taxable values, dated January 9, 1987, was received by the Agency on January 12, 1987. As required by Section 33352(m) of the CRL, the Auditor- Controller's report, including the SBE's portion, is included in this Part IX and is analyzed by the Commission in Part XII.B. of this Report to City Council. (IX -1) V TY O F RANGE OFFICE OF AUDITOR - CONTROLLER S. E. LEWIS AUDITOR- CONTROLLER FINANCE BUILDING 63C NORTH BROADWAY P. O. BOX 567 SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92702 TELEPHONE: 834 -2450 AREA CODE 714 December 15, 1986 -- -n J DEC 16 7 86 Anaheim Redevelopment Agency 76 South Claudina, Suite 300 p71 Anaheim, CA 92805 � _ AS i.... j SUBJECT: Anaheim CRA - Katella Avenue Project Pursuant to Section 33328 et seq. of the California Health and Safety Code, you will find enclosed your copy of the Fiscal Impact Report for the subject redevelopment agency. Further inquiries may be directed to the: County of Orange Auditor - Controller's Office Attn: Tax Section 630 N. Broadway P.O. Box 567 Santa Ana, CA 92702 -0567 Neal G. Gruber Assistant Supervisor Tax Unit NGG : hs�Q Enclosure ON The attached letter was sent to the following: City of Anaheim Anaheim City School District Anaheim Union High School District Orange Unified School District Placentia Unified School District North Orange County Community College District Rancho Santiago Community College District Metropolitan Water District Municipal Water District of Orange County Orange County Transit District Orange County Vector Control District Orange County Water District Orange County Cemetery District Orange County Sanitation District #2 �. Garden Grove Sanitary District Don Datko, Dept. of Education Lynn Hartline, Dept. of Education Bill Hodge, CAO County Counsel Steve Clayton, EMA Management Services TABLE I - HEALTH & SAFETY - CODE 33328 (A) CITY OF ANAHEIM - KATELLA AVENUE PROJECT 1986 -87 BASE YEAR ASSESSMENT ROLL Secured Assessed Value - Local Roll State Board of Equalization - Public Utility Roll Unsecured Assessed Value - Local Roll Total Assessed Value within the Project 1,938,708,552 * 500,376,075 2,439,084,627 * Not Available At This Time - TABLE II - HEALTH & SAFETY CODE 33328 (B) CITY OF ANAHEIM - KATELLA AVENUE PROJECT REPORT OF IDENTIFICATION OF TAXING DISTRICTS WITHIN THE PROJECT Dist # 001E Orange County 051A Anaheim City 221B Anaheim City School District 220A Anaheim Union High School District 200D North O.C. Community College District 600A Dept. of Education 601A Dept. of Education - 710A 0. C. Flood Control District 713A 0. C. Harbor, Beaches & Parks District 703A 0. C. Cemetery District 707A 0. C..Transit District 744A 0. C. Vector Control District 820P Metropolitan Water District 916A 0. C. Sanitation District #2 -- 960A 0. C. Water District 961A 0. C. Water District 863B Municipal Water District of O.C. 420B,C Orange Unified School District 240B Placentia Unified School District 759B Garden Grove Sanitary District 140E Garden Grove Unified School District 100A Garden Grove Unified School District 400C,D Rancho Santiago Community College District 948A 0. C. Street Lighting Assessment District #1 C I .T 00 Ln . -T — %o M V1 -�en OCT-, C O - +OOMt*i�n000�0 Ma0OOO 7o0�t��O w OO�t U ") Ln VII enen ^ fl- oo r- r-I �O en r� M M r� 0O CO r� �D 0 •--� N O O v a0 r� v» Ln %�0 N O n0 N n . - 4 v _ .T M v1 n en N C) O t r� 0+ O` O N .O O .-r N t` O� -+ .• n . - 1\ M O N c0 J.J P M O M w I- r\ IT w to M 1.4 O% O N M IO N C% -T ON w O MNOAIO%Gr\ Ln NM-.O47Nntor`�O%ONmC' H ^ 00 w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w - rn O� �t en M 1O M �t �O M -t 00 I 00 .4 00 00 en N M -4 %O T 00 v1 n S M 00 %0 N 00 M co PG I m 00 M �t N "4 00 I 1 1 I I 1 of 1 I I N I I I N M a, rn I e tr n rZ .- I y a\ C O bb O N tnen NC�M c e N O C C4 M CO M u1N O\M .� try O o v 0 r: 1; en O, r: 1: co M f•C� 'V PG M M N M %0 M N H r „r 'T M - 000 N00 I'D .t%0%t 1 n > O CO (7s O .-a N N M CO n I N N N 0) n O� O N �O -r -+ N O O� --+ �+ 7 •-� M %° a s C Oo •-r w Men :rw -+n'T w ONM -+MO NMM �pn u N -4 en N"O%�°n u900NrM .c4\%,oLnr -,t C'4 CO U H F ri > () N O A tC CY+ 1n O en CO Ln N M rr M IT 00 -4 r\ M �--� ON O U PO M M N �t n + N Ln 00 00 N M eG x W m w w oQC rir w x a A z W o w x w U z > P a � w . w a x 4.1 cn L r >+ y L p H x 1 w cd a d w W A d as > � 0) L U A >r 00 -4 4.J AJ W L m C O N 00 w y fA y L .-I L L +d a) 1 >C `O L U tx uA O L O"4 m w r-a 00 w v M +i u +r u w w U to ..d r--r M L � ".4 a, sw L +1 N L rl L 1J A O Cl U z L Li G1 L+ 00 o L+ IA j >+ d L W y L w >+ w U y -1 L 0) -4 7 cn A -.1 +-1 A O u d L a H O ..r m A u v 3 - � 'O •.a sw C O M w � A to v -a A O w A >, L 1-+ C oo -4 H E C s .a •.r Sw LI L U >w 0) E O U b A H O co , -4 u 0 l+ i,1 U u 14 w r-I M-�4 E O M C) +a z ° O u ° o ° v u w c a $4 a`�i � m�� L b w y s +a L s C C N C) ++ 00 a.I a U C p A M m u C C U t0 O O +a C w O UU >, .q ,-r w ° w cn vn -4 to "c U-r a a 3 Q s L e11 N +1 a 1 C b O u C O O u L yy N C N U Etl °� -1-4 a U 0 0 w u 0 E +J +j x r3. U 6+ C 0 C c0 L o E >E 8UQ e�cn �UUUUUUU r- 'EU 0 SOU -cc w d -cc dddddd�]d oamdUrnm Wd yl —.-+ ONlDOOOOCOO y Ln O • a .7 O O �O �D N p O N Ln .-i O cv 7 T H N r - n rl, r-- ON M N N %0 N ^ O� .7 s A C I .T 00 Ln . -T — %o M V1 -�en OCT-, C O - +OOMt*i�n000�0 Ma0OOO 7o0�t��O w OO�t U ") Ln VII enen ^ fl- oo r- r-I �O TABLE IV - HEALTH & SAFETY CODE 33328 (D) CITY OF ANAHEIM - KATELLA AVENUE PROJECT REPORT OF TOTAL AD VALOREM REVENUE EACH DISTRICT HAS AVAILABLE FROM WITHIN AND OUTSIDE THE PROJECT The revenue data necessary to complete this section of the Fiscal Review Report does not currently exist because of the impact of Assembly Bill 8. An inordinate manual effort and expense would be required of the County Auditor - Controller's staff to gather any reliable substitute data. Therefore, the Fiscal Review Report does not contain the total Ad Valorem Revenue information for the project area. There has been included, however, a supplemental table of comparative assessed values for each taxing district to give a relative indication of Base Year Revenue percentage given up to the CRA. See Table IV (D), Supplement. F z w w a a a a A 00 N M M M w A O U W w d x F d W x I 9 H W a A H H U w ti a W 5 z W d a a W F 0~ H H U 9 d F U pG F to H A C.7 z F-1 X d H d F O F 0 H L1r N x to z O N E-4 a w LYi W U H z w U W W a d h 0 I ID 0 O� W W 0 fs, O H a O a W a w O > d aid L InNWuviujc')u I�oLn0Ln , -.TC 0a0 00 v ,o Ln 0 0 .a O %O 47S �D cr �O h �D CO L "-4 Ln _4 �T ;r �T .T 4 �T z r -Y N h ON N O N O% - O L u L �o h cn M M M M O M M M M M Ln cn 00 O N a` h 0 C O L•• -0 M M N O O O O O y n U) O� M 0 N N N N M N N N N� u 0 N a1 a R+ O H N .r q to C,N ON 0 Q\ u1 01 0 CN O -D N N 1 .0 u, 0 Ln IT It + un LnLn o u1 � u'rM -- �T 0M W Ln 0-+O u I N IT cn N N N N h N M N r+ N .-i .4 0 ON 00 CO h u1 W r C OO O'CC7 00 4 'D O L C toN +MTMC%NOh cn cc 7 'D cn M O� m T Ln ON N ON ON MY �o 00 M O L Q` u1 "-q O A U .:d ; N 0 enC) M �T O Ln 'T 'T m S N N In I I M u1 M u9 M 00 1 O -4 r+ ON C� cr 0 v 1 N O� M c!'1 m M M M M "D In x> cy0000,-+0000 N%O %C 00 1 H d m a� O--4 M u L O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N -T 00 N u'1 N N CO 00 00 "D "D %,o %D �o %D %D %C %D Z �.o %D --T h 00 00 O O L - d I'D M Ln 1�0 0 "T m .= a1 000 000000000000 MMhMO M ++ L Q`CNCr% 000000000000�0 - -1 3 w U1 u 1 u'1 O� 00 04 O% m m M M M M M M M M M M M M h s -IT C MMM�T.T'T'T-.T -'T 'T-T-T-T-T-T N - � N N N N N N N N N N N N N N fV N F O O O O II L C a1 u al a al c O L ddd d ddd A m .4000 -40 t-) +M-Tr-- 0',O0 r-+M 000 00 -+ N N O O O -- •-+ Ln O IT O N .- '.D %D �D N O Ln 'T - A N N N %D 0 h h 0 h h h w ON O) m 0 'T 'T h� N L u U ao L u a1 L L O U •-c v A L N "q O "'r to A O L L O A ,�i L •. L to � N O 3 L U x L -4 "U-1 U A "•4 A U O L w U A L to s+ I "-{ C cn O ".4 U L E U A-1 - R+ c 0 L 4- O W b S.+ , - ,-i A t0 L ,-a +a w L O 1..i -4 U U to 0 E to W to 1 0 0 0 m ,4 L m 0 L $ A U U ••4 w b c0 a "-1 al "•r m A C ++ L C L L to C "-c w L U L A a 00 ) O In ec O w O w O c0 C +4 6 C to O 0 C C >% U 3 +a "' + al 'O 00 to O w U u c0 -4 u y e0 �+ L L A A L +4 co O W O C 7, >+ +a C 0 e0 +� "-� al a1 C . al 00 .0 O S+ al L L O 0 co L L 1- 3 W L >> O U W 41 A u u. W u w x w C U @ U 0 ++ C 4 C m W c0 C W O O - a) 0) 1+ ^� c0 c0 cc a to t 7 u a1 @ 8 0 O U m@ U> F O to 3 3 . a1 0 C C C d 4)_ w u b o a� o• u to s a v v == L L C O .0 .0 U U U U U U c_ ' 'a u c0 c0 w m C C O a) ddzIn 7 O 1.i CO O+ 4 CO C Uti xd L CO a1 C W c0 c0 • - 4 o00z000 0 C u UPS O O O O II L C a1 u al a al c O L ddd d ddd A m .4000 -40 t-) +M-Tr-- 0',O0 r-+M 000 00 -+ N N O O O -- •-+ Ln O IT O N .- '.D %D �D N O Ln 'T - A N N N %D 0 h h 0 h h h w ON O) m 0 'T 'T h� N TABLE V - HEALTH & SAFETY CODE 33328 (E) CITY OF ANAHEIM - KATELLA AVENUE PROJECT REPORT OF AGENCY'S REVENUE IN FIRST YEAR The Auditor - Controller has been advised by the Anaheim Redevelopment Agency that no major structures and improvements will be completed within the Project boundaries during the first year, so therefore we anticipate an average growth in value of the area within the Project boundaries to increase by 8.0 percent. Total 1986 -87 Base Year Revenue $25,673,982.26 Total Expected Percentage Increase in Value 8.0 % 1987 -88 Increment Tax Revenue Estimate $ 2,053,918.58 TABLE VI - HEALTH & SAFETY CODE 33328 (F) CITY OF ANAHEIM - KATELLA AVENUE PROJECT REPORT OF ASSESSED VALUATION BY BLOCK WITHIN THE PROJECT Health and Safety Code, Section 33328 (f) requires: "The assessed valuation of the project area, by block, for the preceding five years, except for state assessed property on the board roll." The assessed valuation data necessary to complete this section of the Fiscal Review Report does not exist because the valuation files maintained by the County do not contain historical assessed values by block. An inordinate manual effort and expense would be required of the County Assessor's and County Auditor's staff to gather any reliable substitute data. Therefore, the Fiscal Review Report does not contain the preceding five -year assessed valuation information for the project area. We are however, providing five year assessed valuation information for the entire city: Total Secured Unsecured Total 1986 -87 1985 -86 1984 -85 1983 -84 1982 -83 9,366,309,668 8,569,701,853 7,808,839,921 6,960,894,638 6,362,920,944 FCV = Full Cash Value 1 ,231 ,207 ,077 1,253 ,685 ,030 1 ,079,250,824 914 ,491,368 912,710,599 10,597,516,745 9,823,386,883 8,888,090,745 7 875,386 ,006 7,275,631,593 FscllmpRep /Tax STATE OF CALIFORNIA �tl_ f STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION WILLIAM M. BENNE First District, KenHield 1020 N STREET, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA CONWAY H. COLLIS (P.O. BOX 1799. SACRAMENTO, CA 95808) Sec• nd District. Los Angeles (916) 322 -2323 January 9, 1987 ERNE ST Third )istrict, �+►� RICHARD NEVINS F"'h District, Pasadena r< ' KENNETH CORY C ontroller, ller, Sacramento J ,V��� Mr. Steven E. Lewis E+enAlve DOUGLAS D BELL Secretary -" Orange County Auditor - Controller �° " 30 630 N. Broadway - Santa Ana, CA 92701 Dear Mr. Lewis: Pursuant to Section 33328 et seq. of the Health and Safety Code, the 1986 -87 assessed values of state - assessed property located within the boundaries of ._ the proposed Katella Redevelopment Project within the City of Anaheim are enclosed. These assessed values will continue to be valid if the project boundaries - remain fixed and the ordinance adopting and approving the redevelopment plan for this project becomes effective prior to August 20, 1987. Very truly yours, Jay E. Hubert Area Office Administrator VALUATION DIVISION JEH:mb Enclosure cc: Mr. Norman J. Priest, Exec. Dir. Anaheim Redevelopment Agency 76 South C'_audina, Suite 300 Anaheim, CA 92805 4�`' =E I \ F D ON ]. Z t07 4 i• tS Is Pi x ►)I AM TIC tit:. ►, JF FP Ftll AS rz JP JA 15 1 °87 IJ �i �� t�\. ��•� VJ1 \i� KATELLA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT within Company the City of Anaheim 1986 -87 Assessed Values Land Improvements Personal Tax-Rate Area 1001 Southern California Gas Company 586,650 Pacific Bell 4,615,660 San Diego Pipeline Company 126,100 9,450 Burlington Northern Railroad 1,760 Southern Pacific Transportation Co. 1,028,240 7,910 7,750 TOTAL 1,154,340 5,219,670 9,510 Tax -rate Are 1007 So. Calif. Edison Co. 278,230 2,048,810 - So. Calif. Gas Co. 1,419,230 Pacific Bell 4,100 12,713,660 2,040 San Diego Pipeline Co. 155,310 20,610 Four Corners Pipe Line Co. 228,900 253,680 Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Ry. Co. 639,080 35,490 22,960 Northwestern Pacific RR Co. 105,000 So. Pacific Transportation Co. 3,026,820 21,690 24,160 °- Western Union Teleg. Co. 29,160 120,940 TOTAL 4,437,440 16,542,330 170,100 Tax -rate Area 1020 So. Calif. Edison Co. 380 So. Calif. Gas Co. 16,350 Pacific Bell 17,230 TOTAL 33,960 Tax -rate Area 1033 ~- So. Calif. Edison Co. 63,790 So. Calif. Gas Co. 293,660 Pacific Be2_1 730,750 _ Western Union Teleg. Co. 120 TOTAL 1,088,200 120 Tax -rate Area 1041 So. Calif. Edison Co. 23,710 So. Calif. Gas Co. 98 Pacific Bell 69,680 -- TOTAL 191,500 -2- KATELLA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT (Cont.) 1986 -87 Assessed Values Company Land Improvements Personal Tax -rate Area 1052 So. Calif. Edison Co. 1,480 Pacific Bell 42,870 TOTAL 44,350 Tax -rate Area 1058 So. Calif. Edison Co. 240 So. Calif. Gas Co. 330 Pacific Bell 140 TOTAL 710 Tax -rate Area 1060 So. Calif. Edison Co. 2,160 So. Calif. Gas Co. 18,690 Pacific Bell 60,940 TOTAL 81,790 Tax -rate Area 1067 So. Calif. Edison Co. 1,780 So. Calif. Gas Co. 1,000 Pacific Bell 52,310 TOTAL 55,090 Tax -rate Area 1068 Pacific Bell 5,400 Tax -rate Area 1073 So. Calif. Gas Co. 3,670 Pacific Bell 10,590 TOTAL 14,260 Tax -rate Area 1081 So. Calif. Edison Co. 520 So. Calif. Gas Co. 3,670 Pacific Bell 31,860 TOTAL 36,050 Tax -rate Area 1082 Pacific Bell 8,280 - Tax -rate Area 1085 Pacific Bell 2,770 Tax -rate Area 1095 Pacific Bell 5,390 -3- KATELLA REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT (Cont.) 1986 -1987 Assessed Values Company Land Improvements Per -onal Tax -rate urea 1113 So. Calif. Edison Co. 19,000 Pacific Bell 22,950 San Diego Pipeline Co. 2,650 So. Pacific Transportation Co. 26,070 490 410 TOTAL 26,070 45,090 410 Tax -rate Area 1116 So. Calif. Edison Co. 15,570 Pacific Bell 61,460 San Diego Pipeline Co. 850 So. Pacific Transp. Co. 12,850 270 220 TOTAL 12,850 78,150 220 Tax -rate Area 1128 Pacific Bell 580 Tax -rate Area 1132 So. Calif. Edison Co. 890 Pacific Bell 1,530 - TOTAL 2,420 Tax -rate Area 1147 So. Calif. Edison Co. 2,240 Pacific Bell 4,670 TOTAL 6,910 GRAND TOTAL WITHIN PROJECT 5,630,700 23,462,900 180,360 Katz Hol 1 is Part X. REPORT OF FISCAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Section 33353 of the Community Redevelopment Law (CRL) provides that a county or any affected taxing entity may call for the creation of a , fiscal review committee within 15 days after receipt from a redevelopment commission a preliminary report prepared pursuant to the requirements of Section 33344.5 of the CRL. As defined in Section 33353.1 of the CRL, the fiscal review committee is composed of one representative from each of the affected taxing agencies. The purpose of the committee would be to identify the fiscal effects of the proposed Redevelopment Plan upon the affected taxing entities, specify additional information, if any, needed to enable those fiscal effects to be identified and analyzed, and suggest possible provisions in the Redevelopment Plan which would alleviate or eliminate a financial burden or detriment. The Preliminary Report for the Katella Redevelopment Project Area was transmitted to all Project Area affected taxing agencies May 4, 1987. -. If a fiscal review committee is called for and formed, the committee's report will be added to this Part X of the Commission's Report to City Council, or submitted separately to the City Council for addition to this Report. (X -1) Katz Hol l is Part XI. NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACT REPORT ..._.. ...._.__ ...................._.. Section 33352(1) of the Community Redevelopment Law (CRL) requires the preparation of a neighborhood impact report if a redevelopment project contains low or moderate income housing. The purpose of the report is to describe in detail the impact of the project upon the residents of the project area and surrounding areas in terms of relocation, traffic circulation, environmental quality, availability of community facilities and services, effect on school population and quality of education, property assessments and taxes, and other matters affecting the physical and social quality of the neighborhood. The neighborhood impact report is also to include: (a) the number of dwelling units housing persons and families of low or moderate income expected to be destroyed or removed from the low and moderate income housing market as part of a redevelopment project; (b) the number of persons and families [households] of low or moderate income expected to be displaced by the project; (c) the general location of housing to be rehabilitated, developed, or constructed pursuant to Section 33413 of the California CRL; (d) the number of dwelling units housing persons and families of low an moderate income planned for construction or rehabilitation, other than replacement housing; (e) the projected means of financing the proposed dwelling units for housing persons and families of low and moderate income planned for construction or rehabilitation; and (f) a projected timetable for meeting the plan's relocation, rehabilitation and replacement housing objectives. Because the Project Area contains dwelling units inhabited by persons and families of low or moderate income, a neighborhood impact report is included herein. Due to overlapping among the data required in the Environmental Impact Report, the Method or Plan for Relocation, the Physical, Social and Economic Conditions in the Project Area and the Neighborhood Impact Report - all of which are contained in this Report to City Council - cross- referencing is employed in order to reflect the most comprehensive data source and to avoid repetition where possible. A. Impact on Residents in Project Area and Surrounding Area 1. Relocation, Traffic Circulation, Environmental Quality and Community 1111. _ 1111._. 1111 _ ommunity Facilities and Servic es . ....... ._....._._ _ 1111_ .......... .........._....11.1...1. The Environmental Impact Report ( "EIR "), referenced in Part VIII of this Report to City Council, presents information on the potential Project impacts upon residents of the Project Area and the surrounding areas, in terms of relocation, traffic circulation, environmental quality, availability of community .facilities and services, and other matters affecting the physical and social quality of the neighborhood. Part II of this Report to Council, "Description of Physical, Social and Economic Conditions Existing in Project Area," also presents pertinent information concerning the above -named impacts to Project residents and adjoining neighborhoods. As described in Part III, the Commission proposes a modest land assembly and disposition program as one of the Agency's (XI -1) Katz Hol 1 is Project implementation activities. Any displacement which occurs as a result of Agency redevelopment activities will be mitigated by the relocation assistance including financial payments, advisory assistance, and replacement housing plan provisions of state law relating to Agency- assisted developments. These provisions are further described in Part IV of this Report to City Council and in Part XI.B. below. 2. School Population and Quality of Education Public education services for the Project Area are provided by three school districts: Anaheim City School District (K -6); Anaheim Union High School District ( junior high, high school); and Garden Grove Unified School District (K -6, junior high, high school). The Garden Grove Unified School District serves a small portion of the southern Project Area approximately bounded by Harbor Boulevard to the west, Simmons Avenue to the north, Haster Street to the east and Chapman Avenue to the south. The Anaheim City School District operates eight elementary schools that serve the Project Area; two (Paul Revere and Benjamin Franklin) are located within the Project Area boundaries. Six high schools operated by the Anaheim Union High School District serve the Project Area. The Garden Grove Unified School District operates three schools (one each elementary, junior high, and high) that serve their portion of the Project Area. As stated in the Project EIR, nine of the 17 schools serving the Project Area are operating below current design capacity. Of the seven schools operating above current design capacity, only two have enrollments significantly in excess of design capacity. The EIR estimates that the number of dwelling units within the Project Area will increase by 3,900 units (from 12,600 to 16,500) over the 35 -year life of the Project. All such units are expected to be multifamily. This growth in dwelling units would generate an estimated 1,482 additional K -5th grade students; 624 more 6th -8th grade students; and 585 additional high school students, and because of the long time frame over which it would occur, it is not expected to be significant. Impacts on public schools may be mitigated by proper attendance forecasting and planning. In addition, the California legislature has changed the rules governing school facilities financing by authorizing school districts to directly levy school impact fees, dedications, or other requirements for temporary or permanent facilities construction. This legislation (Assembly Bill 2926, 1986 Stats. Ch. 887) also allows school districts to impose "any other form of requirement" on developers, including the formation of a Mello -Roos Community Facilities District. This legislation (which became effective January 1, 1987) does, however, place a ceiling on the cumulative amount of developers fees r which can be levied for school facilities. Residential development fees are capped at $1.50 per square foot, and commercial and industrial fees at $.025 per square foot. These caps will be annually adjusted to reflect inflation. These measures would further reduce any potential impact on the school districts resulting from the Project. (XI -2) Katz Hol l is 3. Property Assessment and Taxes .......................................................................................................................... ............................... In general the taxable valuations of property within the Project Area and adjoining the Project Area should increase as development of the Project Area occurs. New development within the Project Area will be assessed at market value, as determined by the assessor. Within and outside the Project Area the assessor may increase property valuations for existing properties at the maximum rate of two percent per year allowed under Proposition 13, regardless of Project - related actions. And, in cases -. where property changes hands, the assessor will likely assess the property at the newly recorded market value. Additionally, the assessor will reassess the added value to property and improvements due to any new development or rehabilitation which occurs. The only other matters potentially affecting property taxes in the Project Area and surrounding areas would be the possibility of °-- additional levies resulting from formation of special assessment districts. There are no proposals for formation of special assessment districts at this time. A parcel evaluation would be undertaken at a later date should it be desired to create a special assessment district within the Project Area. If any such district were created, it would likely be in connection with parking facilities developed within the Project Area. Special assessment districts for various legally permitted purposes may be established by the City in the manner provided by the law where feasible irrespective of whether a redevelopment project is proposed or has been adopted. ._ B. Relocation and Low and Moderate Income Ho _­-1-1-1-- ......... _.__ 1. Housing Units to be Destroyed or Removed 11 ................ .....................__......_. _...................................................................._....................... ....I — —...._......._...._...... _..... - Implementation of the proposed Redevelopment Plan is expected to include Agency acquisition of property within the Project Area for the reasons discussed in Part IV.A above. Over the 35 -year life of the Project the Agency could potentially acquire up to 120 acres of property. Since it is not known precisely where the Agency may acquire property, it cannot be determined with accuracy how may housing units may be destroyed or removed from the housing market. If each acre acquired by the Agency contained, on the average, 4.5 housing units, then up to 540 housing units could be destroyed or removed from the housing market. As noted in Part II. B., approximately 59 percent of Project Area's residents are classified as "low or moderated" income. Applying this proportion to Project Area dwelling units, it is estimated that there are no more than 319 housing units inhabited by low or moderate income families that could be destroyed or removed from the housing market over the 35 -year life of the Project. Whenever dwelling units occupied by persons and families of low or moderate income are removed from the housing market as part of the Project, the Agency would be required to construct, develop or rehabilitate, or cause the construction, development or rehabilitation of, low and moderate income dwelling units equal in number to those destroyed or removed. This must occur within four years of such destruction or removal. Further, twenty percent of the Project tax increment revenues received by the Agency must go to the provision of low and moderate income housing unless (XI -3) Katz Hol l is certain findings are made by the City Council in accordance with the CRL. These low and moderate income "set- aside" revenues may be used by the Agency to provide replacement housing. 2. Projected Residential Displacement As noted above, up to 540 dwelling units could be displaced over the 35 -year life of the Project, although displacement due to direct Agency action is likely to be considerably less. If and when actual displacement were contemplated, the Agency would conduct individual household surveys in order to determine the number, type and location of comparable replacement housing units and the required number of referrals thereto prior to displacement of any persons of low or moderate income. See Part IV of this Report to City Council for an overview of the steps in the relocation process that must be °- undertaken by the Agency prior to displacing any person(s) or family(ies). 3. Number and Location of Replacement Housing' r The specific number and type of replacement housing units required pursuant to CRL Section 33413, if any, are not known at this time since the Agency has not determined specific acquisition sites. As noted above, up to 319 replacement housing units could be required over the life of the Project, although the actual number is anticipated to be much less. r The City Council and the Agency will make findings necessary to provide such housing either inside or outside the Project Area. When the Agency acquires property, enters into a disposition and " development agreement, participation agreement or other agreement, or undertakes any other activities requiring or causing the destruction or removal of housing units from the low and moderate income housing market, -- the Agency will provide replacement housing required pursuant to Section 33413 of the CRL. 4. Number and Location of Low and Moderate Income ............................. ......... _ ...................................... _ ..................................... _.._.. ............. --- ... _ .................... ................................ _... .... _ .... _ ......... ............ ...... ............ Housing Planned Other than Replacement Housing The specific number and type as well as the location of - low and moderate income housing units planned for construction or rehabilitation other than replacement housing units is not known at this time. The Agency presently has no plans to develop such units itself. The Project Area will likely contain up to 3,900 new residential units after full implementation of the proposed Redevelopment Plan as currently envisioned, and at least 15 percent of all such units in the aggregate (1,585 units) must be available at affordable housing costs (i.e., 30 percent of a household's monthly income) to persons and families of low or moderate income. (XI -4) Katz Hol l is 5. Financing Method for Replacement Housing Requirements 11 .... ................ ...................... _ _................ I The Agency will employ as necessary any of the methods outlined in Part III of this Report to City Council to meet replacement housing requirements and other obligations under the Redevelopment Plan and Community Redevelopment Law. Not less than 20 percent of all taxes which may be allocated to the Agency pursuant to Section 33670 of Article 4 of the CRL shall be used by the Agency for purposes of increasing and improving the supply of low and moderate income housing available at affordable housing cost to persons and families of low or moderate income and very low income households, unless certain findings prescribed in the law are made. 6. Timetable for Provision of Relocation and Housing .... .... .......... .... ..­ 0 16 jectives . ............................... I ............... If replacement housing is to be provided pursuant to Section 33413 of the CRL, the Agency shall take necessary steps to cause the construction, rehabilitation or development of such housing in accordance with the time limits prescribed by law. The relocation plan(s) prepared by the Agency for a particular development activity shall contain schedules to insure comparable replacement housing is available in accordance with the requirements of the CRL and the State Relocation Guidelines. C. Other Matters Affecting the Physical and Social Quality of the . I.I.I.-II.-I.- . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ . . . . . . ....... . . . . . ... . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... . ........... . . . . . . . . . . ................... . . . . . . . . . . ................................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................ . . . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Environment The Katella Redevelopment Project will have a beneficial impact upon residents, property owners, and businesses in the area. Implementation of the Project will bring about coordinated growth and development, making the Project Area a more attractive and livable community. The Redevelopment Plan will help the City to reverse decline without the need for more extensive and expensive measures in the future. Through rehabilitation and new construction of low and moderate income housing, including housing for senior citizens, the redevelopment process will increase the availability of quality housing in the Project Area and City for a cross section of income groups. In addition, the commercial, and residential development projects that will be brought about as a result of redevelopment action will stimulate the job - producing economy. Thus, unemployment conditions in the Project Area may be improved, which in turn will improve the soci- economic situation of the residents. Land use classifications within the Redevelopment Plan are intended to conserve neighborhoods by limiting commercial development into residential areas. The land use provisions contained in the Plan are intended to upgrade the environment in the Project Area and discourage additionally commercial traffic in residential neighborhoods. (XI -5) Katz Hol lis PART XII. ANALYSIS OF REPORT OF COUNTY FISCAL OFFICER; SUMMARY OF CONSULTATIONS WITH AFFECTED TA %ING AGENCIES; AN D ANALYSIS OF AND RESPONSE TO REPORT OF FISCAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. Introduction Pursuant to Section 33352(m) of the CRL, a report to city council must include an analysis of the county fiscal officer's report as well as a summary of the consultations of the commission, or such attempts to _. consult, with each of the affected taxing agencies. Section 33352(m) also requires a report to city council to include the redevelopment commission's analysis of the report of the fiscal review committee, if any, which shall include the commission's response to such report, any additional information the commission may desire to provide, and any measures to mitigate detrimental fiscal impact the commission may desire to propose. This Part XII of the Commission's Report to the City Council addresses the - requirements of Section 33352(m). B. Analysis of Report to County Fiscal Officer ........... .._.._ ............ . . ......... . ......_ 1. Report Requirements Section 33328 of the CRL requires the county fiscal officer (i.e., Auditor - Controller) responsible for the allocation of property taxes to prepare and deliver a specific report to the Redevelopment Commission and each affected taxing agency. (Affected taxing agencies are those governmental entities which levied a property tax on all or any portion of Project Area Property "...in the fiscal year prior to submission of the [redevelopment] plan to the [fiscal review] committee "). The following items are required to be included in the Auditor - Controller's report: a. The total assessed valuation of all taxable property within the Project Area as shown on the base year assessment roll. b. The identification of each taxing agency levying taxes in the Project Area. C. The amount of tax revenue to be derived by each taxing agency from the base year assessment roll from the Project Area, including state subventions for homeowners, business inventory, and similar subventions. d. For each taxing agency, its total ad valorem tax revenues from all property within its boundaries, whether inside or outside the Project Area. e. The estimated first year taxes available to the Redevelopment Agency, if any, based upon information submitted by the Redevelopment Agency, broken down by taxing agencies. (XII -1) Katz Hol l is f. The assessed valuation of the Project Area for the preceding year, or, if requested by the Redevelopment Commission, for _ the preceding five years, except for state assessed property on the board roll. 2. Analysis of Data Reported by County Fiscal Officer The report of the Orange County Auditor - Controller was transmitted to the Commission on December 15, 1986. The report, although not addressing the fiscal effect of the Project upon affected taxing agencies, W is nevertheless referred to by the Auditor - Controller as the "Fiscal Impact Report." The report does not include taxable value information on state - assessed property since the State Board of Equalization (SBE) report on such values had not been issued at the date of the Auditor- Controller's report. The Agency subsequently received a copy directly from the SBE. Copies of both the Auditor - Controller's report and the SBE report are included in Part Ili of this Report to City Council. a. Total Assessed Valuation of All Taxable Property Within Project Ar . ea as Shown o" n B ase Year Assess - ment Roll. ............................. ............................... ............ ............................... The 1986 -87 base year value reported by the Auditor- Controller for the Project Area is $2,439,084,627, which includes $1,938,708,552 in local secured value and $500,376,075 in local unsecured value. The Auditor - Controller's reported values are aggregated figures, and do not distinguish between land, improvements, or personal property values. While such categorical distinctions are not required by law, such information is useful in projecting future values due to different assessment parameters applicable to real property and other property. -° The SBE reports an additional $29,273,960 in state - assessed value for the Project Area, giving a combined total taxable value of $2,468,358,587 for the Project. b. Identification of Each Taxing Agency Levying Taxes ....... in Project Area. ............ ............................... The Auditor - Controller's report identifies the following 21 Project Area taxing agencies: -. City of Anaheim Anaheim City School District Anaheim Union High School District Orange Unified School District Placentia Unified School District Garden Grove Unified School District North Orange County Community College District Rancho Santiago Community College District Orange County Department of Education County of Orange Orange County Flood Control District (XII -2) Katz Hol l is Orange County Harbor, Beaches & Parks District Orange County Cemetary District Orange County Transit District Orange County Vector Control District Orange County Sanitation District #2 Orange County Street Lighting Assessment -° District #1 Orange County Water District Municipal Water District of Orange County _ Metropolitan Water District Garden Grove Sanitary District As noted above, taxing agencies are defined to include governmental entities who levied a property tax on all or any portion of Project Area property in the prior fiscal year. Neither the Municipal Water District of Orange County or the Placentia Unified School District levied a property tax in the Project Area in 1985 -86. While the water district's boundaries are within the Project Area, the school district's boundaries are not. Accordingly, these two districts appear to have been erroneously identified as affected taxing agencies for the Project. In addition, the boundaries of both the Orange County Street Lighting Assessment District #1 and the Garden Grove Sanitary District are no longer within the Project Area. These two districts, therefore, will not be affected taxing agencies in the future with regard to the Katella Project Area. C. Amount of Tax Revenue to be Derived by Each ..............................................-..............._................... ..... ........................................... ............................... Taxing Agency from the Base Year As Roll ................................... ............................... _..............._......................_.................................................. ............................... from the Project Area, Including State Subventions for Homeowners, Business Inventory, and Similar ............................................................................................................_.............................................................................................................. ........................_...... . Subventions. The Placentia Unified School District, the Garden Grove Sanitary District, and the Orange County Street Lighting Assessment District #1 are all three erroneously shown as receiving base year property tax revenues from Project Area property. d. Total Ad Valorem Tax Revenue for Each Taxing Agency from All Property Within It's Boundaries, Whether Inside or Outside Project Area. The Auditor - Controller's report does not include the total ad valorem tax revenues for each taxing agency from within its boundaries, whether inside or outside the Project At-ea. The report asserts that "the revenue data necessary to complete this section of the ...[report] (XII -3) Table III of the Auditor- Controller's report presents, by taxing agency, the amount of property tax revenue each agency will derive from the 1986 -87 base year roll, both from the basic $1 tax rate and, where applicable, from tax overrides. A combined total of $24,390,846 in property taxes will be generated by the basic $1 per $100 tax rate, and another $1,283,136 in combined taxes will be derived from override tax rates. The Placentia Unified School District, the Garden Grove Sanitary District, and the Orange County Street Lighting Assessment District #1 are all three erroneously shown as receiving base year property tax revenues from Project Area property. d. Total Ad Valorem Tax Revenue for Each Taxing Agency from All Property Within It's Boundaries, Whether Inside or Outside Project Area. The Auditor - Controller's report does not include the total ad valorem tax revenues for each taxing agency from within its boundaries, whether inside or outside the Project At-ea. The report asserts that "the revenue data necessary to complete this section of the ...[report] (XII -3) - KatzHollis does not currently exist because of the impact of Assembly Bill 8," and "an �- inordinate manual effort and expense would be required... to gather any reliable substitute data." As a substitute, the report provides a supplemental table of comparative assessed values for each taxing agency, "... to give a relative indication of base year revenue percentage given up to the CRA." The supplemental table provided by the Auditor- Controller- shows that except for the City of Anaheim and the two local school districts, no taxing agency has more than 11.3 percent of its total assessed value within the Project Area. Disregarding the Garden Grove Sanitary District (which is actually not an affected taxing agency), 12 of 21 Project Area taxing agencies have less than 2.4 percent of their total assessed value within the boundaries of the Project. e. Estimated, First Year Taxes Available to . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................... .......... . . . ............. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................... . ............................ Redevelopment Agency, Broken Down by Taxing 1. ...... .... . ............................... . . ..... Agencies. ...... .... . ... ......._.. The Auditor - Controller estimates, on the basis of an assumed eight percent growth from base year revenues, that the first year (1987 -88) revenues available to the Agency will total $2,053,919. This amount is not broken down by taxing agencies. This figure is somewhat higher - than the approximately $1.4 million the Agency would have received had it been eligible to receive tax increment in 1987 -88. (The $1.4 million figure can be deduced from Table III -5 in Part III of this Report to City Council) As provided in Section 33674 of the CRL, the first year that the Agency will x_ be eligible to receive tax increment revenues from the Katella Project Area will be the tax year which begins after the January 1st next following the adoption of the Project and the filing of certain specified documents by the Commission. Assuming the Project is adopted and the required documents filed no later than December 31, 1987, the first year the Agency will receive tax increment revenues will be "tax year" (fiscal year) 1988 -89. f. Assessed Valuation of Project Area for Preceding Year, or for Preceding Five Years, Except for State Assessed Property on Board Ro11. The Auditor - Controller's report does not include assessed valuation data for the preceding year or the preceding five years for the Project Area. "Inordinate manual effort and expense" is again cited as the reason for omission of this data. In lieu of the required data, the report substitutes a five year history of total secured and unsecured values for the City of Anaheim as a whole. The substituted data has little bearing on an analysis of Project Area valuation and taxation data, unless a comparison could be made between City -wide valuation growth and Project Area valuation growth. Such comparison cannot be made because the necessary Project Area valuation data has been omitted from the Auditor - Controller's report. (XII -4 ) Katz Hol l is C. Summary of Consultations with Affected Taxing Agencies ...... . .._._ Section 33328 of the CRL requires the Commission, prior to the publication of notice of joint Commission /Council public hearing on the proposed Redevelopment Plan, to consult with each affected taxing agency with respect to the proposed Redevelopment Plan and the allocation of tax increment revenues. When the Commission has completed such consultations, _- a summary will be prepared and added to this Report to City Council or submitted separately to the City Council for addition to this Report. D. Analysis of and Response to Report of Fiscal .1-1. ._ ......... .... .. _ ... ...... . .. ... .... ... .............._........ ....................... Review Committee (XII -5) As noted in Part X of this Report to City Council, if a fiscal review committee is called for in connection with the Project, after the report of the fiscal review committee has been issued it will be added to Part X of this Report or submitted separately to the City Council for addition to this Report. In addition, as required by Section 33352(m) of the CRL, the Commission will analyze and respond to the fiscal review committee's report, and such analysis and response will be added to this Report or submitted separately to the City Council for addition to this Report. (XII -5)