Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/17/84 MINUTES RA MINUTES BAKERSFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Regular Meeting--October 17, 1984 The Regular Meeting of the Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency was called to order by Chairman Rockoff on Wednesday, October 17, 1984 at 5:00 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. The Secretary called the roll as follows: MEMBERS PRESENT: James Barton James Childs Chris Christensen Rollie Moore Thomas Payne Art Rockoff MEMBERS ABSENT: Donald Ratty MINUTES Upon a motion by Agency Member Moore, the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 29, 1984 were approved as presented. REPORTS 1. Oral report and slide presentation on the recently completed Facade Rehab Workshop. Mr. Kennon stated that the Agency approved an experimental program that addresses the issue of upgrading facades in some of the downtown businesses. Be stated that workshops were conducted by the Golden Empire Chapter of the American Institute of Architects, the Downtown Business Association and Economic Development staff. Nineteen busi- nesses expressed interest, and eight applications have been received which will result in the upgrading of twelve businesses. Mr. Shillcock, Principal Planner, presented a slide presentation of the program and identified some of the buildings to be rehabilitated. He stated that Henley's Photo has started their rehabilitation which would include work on the awnings, color coating and new signage. He stated that the other buildings would need the services of an architect because their work is more extensive. He stated that within the next month, four businesses will begin work on their structures. The amount allocated for this program was $50,000 and $47,000 in applications were received. CONSENT CALENDAR (a) Approval of Vouchers No. 53 thru 82 totaling $38,022.30. (b) Approval of Design Review Board recommendations: 1. Signage for Babcock's Book Store, 1629 - 19th Street, Design Review Board recommends approval. 2 o Signage for Byrum, Kimball, Carrick, Koontz and Crear Law Office, 1515 - 20th Street, Design Review Board recommends approval. Upon a motion by Agency Member Barton, items (a) and (b) of the Consent Calendar were approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: Childs, Christensen, Moore, Payne, Rockoff, Barton NOES: None ABSENT: Ratty Agency Member Payne stated that he would not participate in the following matter upon the advise of the City Attorney for reasons previously stated. NEW BUSINESS (a) Review proposed bridge connection for the Truxtun Galleria project. Agency Member Christensen withdrew from this discussion stating he had a conflict of interest, be it real or imaginary. BAKERSFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING, October 17, 1984 - Page 2 Agency Member Barton questioned if the Agency could retract their position and go back to the other position which would allow for greater retail participation in the retail area without having a public hearing to amend the DDA. City Attorney Oberholzer stated that this particular matter is a conceptual plan, and the DDA does not specifically state the type of construction for the ramp. He stated that if both parties agree, then there will be no public hearing. Mr. Kennon stated that approval of this change in design is an approval on a conceptual basis. Agency Member Childs asked if the Agency approves the conceptual plans, would it change the portion of the DDA that deals with the negotiations between Chester Avenue Associates regarding the ramp. City Attorney Oberholzer stated that the DDA requires the developer to submit to the Redevelopment Agency an agreement with California Republic Bank for the acquisition of that property where the ramp is located. The approval of this conceptually will negate the need for that agreement to be presented to the Agency. If the developer does not submit an agreement to the Agency, the Agency can still allow the project to proceed without an agreement. It does not required modifica- tion of the DDA, it does require the Agency's approval to proceed since the developer was declared in default on September 27 for the failure to obtain an agreement with California Republic Bank. Agency Member Childs questioned if California Republic Bank has been fully apprised of the proposed change and questioned their feelings about it. Mr. Kennon stated that they have been informe~ and a letter was received from California Republic Bank delineating several issues, but that they did not oppose the change. Mr. Richard McBurnie, Attorney for California Republic Bank, was present and stated that California Republic Bank has been informed of this change, and they have received a copy of the conceptual drawings which they have reviewed. The bank did have a few minor concerns about the change and those concerns have been the subject of discussion between the Moreland Corporation and the Bank. He stated that all those concerns have been resolved. Agency Member Barton requested that the Secretary read the staff report dated October 12, 1984 regarding the proposed pedestrian bridge connection for the Truxtun Galleria. "The developer of the Truxtun Galleria indicated, during his presentation at the September 27, 1984 Redevelopment Agency meeting as a proposed solution to the requirement to remove an existing ramp which provides access to the second level of the California Republic Bank parking structure. The developer indicated that he failed to reach the necessary agreement with the holder of the leasehold interest of that ramp and thus was proposing the construction of a cantilevered pedestrian bridge that would provide access between the tower building located on the corner of Truxtun and Chester Avenue and the retail Ga±±er±~ ~urticn o~ ~he project. This would be located entirely over the public right-of-way and would provide a direct pedestrian link between the tower and the retail Galleria. Access to the California Republic Bank parking structure ramp would be maintained in its present configuration. "Staff has reviewed the conceptual plans submitted by the developer and has determined that it is acceptable in terms of providing adequate pedestrian circulation as well as providing an aesthetically pleasing architectural feature to the street scene of Truxtun Avenue. "The bridge in its present configuration and placement would, in fact, serve to screen the rather barren and unattractive ramp and upper levels to the existing parking lot and thus, to some degree, upgrade the appearance of Truxtun Avenue at its location. BAKERSFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING, October 17, 1984 - Page 3 "We, therefore, are recommending approval of this concept con- ditioned upon providing adequate clearance between the sidewalk and bridge structure for delivery and service-type vehicles that may occa- sionally need access to the second level of the parking structure. Additionally, we are recommending that California Republic Bank be fully apprised of this proposed element of the Truxtun Galleria, and that all reasonable concerns regarding this element be adequately addressed in the final design of the pedestrian bridge. "It is recommended that actions taken by the Agency to approve this concept should also be conditioned upon the requirement that any agree ments required by this concept between the developer and California Republic Bank or any other individuals or organizations shall be pre- sented to the Agency pursuant to the action taken September 27, 1984 regarding the developer's default of the Disposition and Development Agreement." Agency Member Barton made a motion to accept the staff report which was approved. Ms. Walters, citizen, was present and questioned the proposed use for this change, the requirement for the bridge in the first phase and any circulation proposed between the two structures. Mr. Gordon Gill, of Millard Archuleta, Eddy, Paynter Associates, stated that the bridge is to provide for pedestrian traffic on both the second level of the garden top of the mall, back and forth between the office structure and the mall development. Agency Member Moore questioned the City Manager if the staff recommendation reflects his position, and asked the City Attorney he is supportive of staff's recommendation. if Executive Director Caravalho stated that he concurred with the staff recommendation. City Attorney Oberholzer stated that he approves it only from a legal standpoint and approves it with the condition that the developer be required to provide any agreements that might be necessary with any individuals or organizations and also the necessity for getting an encroachment permit. These agreements must be provided before the date set for default. Agency Member Moore asked the City Attorney, after completion of the motion, to be sure there is no question in his mind about the legality of the change. He made a motion that the Agency approve this conceptually, however, the Moreland Corporation must obtain any necessary approvals that might be required by either the underlying or adjoining land owners prior to the deadline that was established by the Redevelopment Agency at the September 27 meeting. Agency Member Barton questioned if the motion was to approve this particular concept and also approve the air space rights over the ramp. Agency Member Moore responded that he was willing to accept the conceptual request; however, the responsibility must remain with the Moreland Corporation, should there be any further requirement from any other adjoining property owners and taking the responsibility off of the City and placing it on the Moreland Corporation before the Agency approves it. Chairman Rockoff stated that since this concept does not specifically touch the property of California Republic Bank and Chester Avenue Associates, he questioned whether or not other parties can arbitrarily say that they don't want this concept and that will kill the situation because the Moreland Corporation will be in default. Agency Member Childs questioned who owned the air space over the sidewalk. City Attorney Oberholzer responded that it is owned by the City, but the property owners have a right of expectation for ingress and egress on the property. BAKERSFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING, October 17, 1984 - Page 4 Agency Member Childs questioned if the Agency and the Moreland Corporation agree to the concept of the ramp, would the Agency need approval from California Republic Bank. City Attorney Oberholzer stated that this issue needed to be evaluated, but that the Bank has indicated that they have resolved their differences. Mr. Wegis stated that in the newspaper it has been reported that the Moreland Corporation is threatening to sue the City. He stated that they have always directed their efforts to going forward with this project, and only when they recognize that it is a failure would they then be forced to consider another option with respect to the staff to attempt to engender the spirit of cooperation that was felt necessary for both parties to work on this. He stated that there was some concern that this may be used in some future action, and he would identify that area and specifically waive it. He stated that they would provide any assurances that they will do what they say. He stated that if the Agency needs some reassurances to back up what California Republic Bank has indicated, a letter can be provided. He stated that any agreements required regarding the approval of this concept shall be presented to the Agency pursuant to the action of September 27, which is in reference to the California Republic Bank's acquiescence to the plan. He requested that if something occurs that has not been addressed, that they cross that bridge when they get to it, and also requested that they not be left in the dark on what they should do. Agency Member Barton stated that if the Agency is going to develop or accept this particular concept, the developer and other interested parties should know exactly what is going to be required of this concept because it is a change in the default provision. He requested that staff be more explicit in their recommendation as to what other require- ments, such as the conditional use permit and air rights, might be necessary. City Attorney Oberholzer stated that an encroachment permit is required and major drawings would have to be submitted for a permit to be granted. He stated that the Agency should ask the developer to present an agreement with California Republic Bank and property owners and indicate that they are satisfied with that design and that it would not infringe on their use of the property. He indicated that it should be the burden of the developer to satisfy these matters. Mr. Wegis stated that they have worked with California Republic Bank and the issues seemed to be resolved. He, therefore, requested that the Agency recognize that they have done everything within their knowledge to satisfy the Agency on this issue and also asked that the Agency accept this proposal and deem the Moreland Corporation not in default on this issue. Agency Member Childs stated that the Agency has not caused the developer to be in default or cause them any problems in meeting the deadline. City Attorney Oberholzer stated that there would be no change in the default provisions in the DDA, but one of the provisions stated that the developer must submit an agreement for the acquisition of the property and the Agency has the right to approve or disapprove that agreement. The agreement had a time period in which it had to be sub- mitted, and the developer failed to meet that time and was therefore declared in default. He explained that they are requesting that instead of acting on that matter for requiring an agreement, an alter- native design has been presented and an agreement is no longer necessary and, consequently, the Agency will be relieving him from those default provisions. He stated that Agency Member Moore's motion does not fully relieve him from the default provision, it simply states that the Agency will accept this concept if the developer assures the Agency that this project can be done this way. BAKERSFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING, October 17, 1984 Page 5 Executive Director Caravalho stated that the issue is whether at the end of the 30-day period the default criteria or issues that were placed before the Agency are still in default. He stated that the issue, if acceptable from a conceptual view, is also a requirement. They must have something in writing from the bank prior to the end of the 30 days, and if the Agency wants to proceed with the project at some later date, the Agency can require that an encroachment permit be necessary, and then deal with this issue knowing that it is an acceptable alternative. At the end of the 30 days, the developer can address the remaining issue of financing and a report can be prepared by staff indicating those areas that are still deficient. The issue is the acceptability of this proposal versus what is required in the DDA. He suggested that the Agency continue this meeting to November 7 and require that all material from the developer regarding his per- formance be submitted by October 29 in order to allow staff and other experts to evaluate the project and its performance and return with a recommendation to the Agency for their decision. Mr. Gordon Gill questioned whether the staff is asking that the encroachment permit be in hand on November 7 or that they be required as a part of the submittal of the working drawings and construction document. Mr. Kennon stated that normally the encroachment permit would occur after the completion of the design or working drawings. It would be difficult to define what kind of encroachment permit would be needed until that time. He stated that when they submit their final working documents, it would be appropriate to consider an encroachment permit. Ms. Elizabeth Van Alstein, citizen, was present and asked several questions of the Agency and staff regarding the Galleria project. Executive Director Caravalho suggested that Mr. Moreland present by the end of the 30 days all of the information to the staff in order that the staff would then review the material and submit a report to the Agency. Ms. Walters asked several questions of the Agency regarding the design and the air rights to this project. She questioned if this would bind the City to be in a position to take the air space by eminent domain. Chairman Rockoff responded that the attorney and staff feel that the Agency is protected. Agency Member Moore called for the question, which was approved. Agency Member Barton requested a point of information regarding the motion indicating that staff mentioned that an encroachment permit would not be necessary, but that this motion states that all other permits, property owner approvals, and approval of the concept had to be obtain prior to the end of the default period. Agency Member Moore concurred with staff's recommendation that the encroachment permit would be separate. Agency Member Moore's motion that the Agency approve this con- ceptually, however, the Moreland Corporation must obtain any necessary approvals, except the encroachment permit, that might be required by either the underlying or adjoining land owners prior to the deadline that was established by the Redevelopment Agency at the September 27 meeting, was approved by the following roll call vote: AYES: Childs, Moore, Rockoff, Barton NOES: None ABSENT: Payne, Ratty, Christensen RECESS There being no further business to come before the Redevelopment Agency, Agency Member Barton made a motio~ to recess the meeting until 5:00 p.m. on November 7. ~Br e/go~ i~m~_ o, Secretary aker~f~'eld Redevelopment Agency ~RTH~R-L. ROCKOFF; ~an Bakersfield Redevelc~nt Agency