HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/28/83 MINUTES RA MINUTES
BAKERSFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Regular Meeting--September 28, 1983
The Regular Meeting of the Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency
was called to order by Chairman Barton on Wednesday, September
28, 1983 at 5:05 p.m. The Secretary called the roll as follows:
[.1EMBERS PRESENT:
Thomas Payne
John [4eans
James Barton
Art Rockoff
Chris Christensen
MEMBERS ABSENT:
Donald Ratty
~INUTES
[4inutes of the Regular Meeting of September 14, 1983 were
approved as presented.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC STATEMENTS
~lr. Tom McBride, Developer of the Bakersfield Sheraton Hotel
Projectg introduced Mr. Gordon Bell, Director of West Coast Deve]c.?--
ment for AIRCOA. Mr. Bell stated that AIRCOA is one of the larg-
est hotel management firms in the United States. It operates 43
properties with over 12,000 rooms and is the largest franchise
operator of Sheraton Hotels in the United States.
He s~_ated that the October 17th date that has been set for
showing evidence of financing will be met. He is optimistic that
they will be participating in the Project. Mr. Bell stated that
AiRCOA has made their own marketing and financial analyses of the
project. One of 'the most positive items AIRCOA likes about the
Hotel Project is the teamwork that is involved with the three-way
partnership involving the City and the Agency, local investors and
professional development. Between now and the 17th of October
they will be presenting some ideas that they feel will enhance the
project to the City's investmen~ counselors and staff.
Agency Member Christensen asked !4r. Bell who the local in-
vestors are.
iJr. Bell responded that he was not in a position to identify
the local J_nvestors at this time.
Agency [~emoer Christensen then asked what percentage o~ the
financing comes from local investors.
l]r. Bell responded that a large percentage of 'the equity would
come from the local investors. He stated that if AIRCOA is in-
volved, they would agree to cover some of the percentage of the
equity if it cannot be raised locally.
Lgency ?[ember Christensen then questioned staff who the local
investors are.
Executive Director Kelmar stated that they were not prepared
ho name them at this time.
Agency Member Christensen then asked if there were local
investors.
Executive Director Kelmar stated that when AIRCOA presents
their evidence of financing that it will indicate how and where
the money is coming from.
Agency ~[ember Rockoff then questioned staff as to where the
Agency is concerning acquiring the land.
Mr. Kennon stated that the offers have been drafted and
staff is waiting for the completion of the Developer's financing
package to move on the project. The property appraisals have
been completed. Mr. Kennon stated that offers have not been made
to the property owners. However, the Agency staff have had num-
erous conversations with 'the property owners and they do not fore-
see any major problems. Staff anticipates expediting that portion
of the Hotel Project in an expeditious manner.
Agency Member Rockoff questioned staff as to how long after
the October 18, 1983 meeting before action on this project would
take place.
Executive Director Kelmar responded that the Agency would
have to review the inforn~ation that was presented and then the
Agency has to approve the financing and then proceed.
Agency Member Rockoff asked if the Agency is presently
acting in the best interests of the City by fulfilling all the
requirements stipulated in the existing Disposition and Develop-
ment Agreement.
~qr. Kennon replied in the affirmative.
Agency Member Christensen stated that since the Agency has
been so close on the Hotel Project several times before, he would
like to know if staff foresees any problems now, and if so, what
thev are.
Executive Director Kelmar stated that as long as the evidence
of financing is there and is found to be satisfactory, he cannot
foresee any stumbling blocks.
REPORTS
1. Oral Report by City Attorney Oberholzer
The City Attorney reported that when the City acquires land,
they use various title companies to do title work for them. They
try to alternate the work among all the title companies, especially
those located downtown in the redevelopment area. It has been
brought to the City Attorney's attention by the Economic Develop-
ment Department that in 1979 the City entered into an exclusive
contract with Title Insurance and Trust Company that prohibits
the Agency with going to any other title company with title work.
%:flere is, however, a provision for a ten-day termination notice
and he would like to have the Agency's permission to send Title
Insurance and Trust Company the ten-day notice of termination.
That doesn't mean that the City wouldn't use Title insurance and
Trust Company~ but it woulG eliminate the exclusive contract. The
staff doesn't feel that it is fair to the other title companies as
they all do basically the sa~i~e thin% and the fees charged are pretty
much the same.
Agency Member Rockoff questioned the City Attorney as to why
the Agreement was entered into at that time.
City Attorney Oberholzer responded that at that time the
Agency probably felt 'that they got the best deal from Title In-
surance. Mr. Oberholzer felt that it would be in the Agency's
best interests if the exclusive contract was terminated as all of
the title companies can basically provide the same service at
competitive prices.
Agency Member Christensen questioned whether or not the
Agency is required to accept the lowest bid.
City Attorney Oberholzer stated that since this is not a
PUblic Works contract, the Agency is not required to accept the
lowest bid, the Agency can select a competent company to perform
the work.
- 2 -
Agency Member Christensen made a motion to issue the ten-day
notice of termination to Title Insurance and Trust Company. The
motion carried by a voice vote.
AGENCY ACTION
1. Consent Calendar
(a)
Approval of Vouchers No. 68 through 99 totaling
$303,942.23.
Agency Member Means made a motion to approve item (a) of the
Consent Calendar.
Agency Member Rockoff verified with staff that the invoice
from Parr Contracting for $257,705.10 was correct and that all
work had actually been performed. Agency Member Rockoff then
seconded the motion. The motion carried by the following roll
call vote:
AYES: Rockoff, Means,
NOES: None
ABSTAINS: None
ABSENT: Ratty
Christensen, Barton, Payne
(b)
Approval of Design Review Board recommendations
relative to projects in the Redevelopment Project
Area.
1. Sign for Tandy Leather, 2021 Chester Avenue
Recommendation: approve sign.
2 o
Exterior renovation (painting) of Bakersfield
Hotel, 1202 19th Street
This item has been deleted from the agenda.
3. Sign for California Republic Bank, 17th and
Chester Avenue
Recommendation: disapprove due to excessive
existing signage.
4. Planters along 17th and "K" Streets (East side
of "K" Street, north of 17th Street and south
of an alley)
Recommendation: approve planters.
Agency Member Means made a motion to adopt the Design Review
Board's recommendations. The motion carried by the following
roil call vote:
AYRES: l',~ean s, Rockoff,
~O:~S: ~one
A~STAINS: N one
ABSENT: Ratty
Payne, Christensen, Barton
2. New Business
(a)
Letter from ~.iilazzo & Associates Architects dated
September 19, ].983 agreeing to provide Plan Check
Review for the lSth & Eye Street Parking Structure.
Agency ldember Rockoff stated that documents received by Agency
~lembers listed a fee of $5,000 for this service. He stated that
he would like an explanation from staff as to why it's necessary
to go outside our own department when we already have people to
do this type of work and make an additional expend~ture.
Executive Director Kelmar stated that at this time there is
approximately a six to eight week backlog in the Building Depart-
ment for Plan Check services. The Agency really has no other
- 3 -
alternative at
and feels that
performed.
this time. Mr. Bidwell has reviewed the proposal
it is a reasonable fee for the amount of work to be
Agency Member Rockoff stated that he wasn't questioning the
amount of the fee, but rather whether the situation in the Build-
ing Department warranted looking into to determine if additional
personnel was needed.
Executive Director Kelmar responded that Mr. Bidwell is
monitoring the situation and will advise him if the backlog
appears to be an ongoing situation.
Agency Member [ieans stated that he had a problem approving
the firm of Mr. Milazzo to do the work (not because of any personal
reasons as Milazzo & Associates is probably one of the best archi-
tectural firms in town) because of [~r. Milazzo's position on the
Planning Commission.
City Attorney Oberholzer stated that Mr. Milazzo is not
entering into an agreement with the City that would be prohibited
by section 1090 of Lhe Government Code.
Agency Member Means stated that he was sure that it was legal
for Mr. Milazzo to do the work. However, since Mr. Milazzo had
attended meetings with the Planning Commission, he just didn't
feel it was right to approve Mr. Milazzo's firm to do the Plan
Check Review.
Agency Member Christensen asked if [dr. Milazzo had partici-
pated in any discussions.
City Attorney Oberholzer responded that he had not.
Agency Member Christensen also asked if this project had
gone before the Planning Commission.
City Attorney Oberholzer replied that it had not because
it is an Agency project.
Agency Member Christensen asked if the project went before
the Design Review Board.
City Attorney Oberholzer responded that it had.
Agency Member Christensen asked if Mr. Milazzo had participated
in any discussions along the way and if Mr. Milazzo has a conflict.
City Attorney Oberholzer stated that ~4r. Milazzo had partici-
pated, buk as a consultant retained by the Ci~y~ not as a Planning
Commission member and that he does not have a conflict.
Agency Member Payne asked if anyone on staff knew whether or
not this project had been approved by the time Mr. Milazzo was
appointed to the Planning Commission or whether he was on the
Planning Commission at the time this project was approved.
City Attorney Oberholzer responded that Mr. Milazzo was on
· the Planning Commission before this project came to the Redevelop-
ment Agency.
Agency Member Payne questioned whether or not this project,
once approved by the Agency, was subject to conditions or approval
or design review or anything by the Planning Commission at any stage.
City Attorney Oberholzer answered that it was his understand-
ing that the project didn'~ go to the Planning Commission at any
stage.
Agency Member Payne questioned staff as to whether or not any
Redevelopment Agency projects are going to go before the Planning
Commission such as the Galleria Project for design review, approval
or anything.
City Attorney Oberholzer stated that he couldn't foresee it
happening as the Redevelopment Agency short-circuits the Planning
Commission.
Agency Member Rockoff made a motion 'to approve the proposal
from Milazzo & Associates Architects dated September 19, 1983
to provide the Plan Check Review for the 18th & Eye Street Parking
Structure.
The motion carried by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Barton, Rockoff,
NOES: Means
ABSTAINS: Christensen
ABSENT: Ratty
Payne
Agency Member Christensen questioned City Attorney Oberholzer
as to whether or not Mr. Ratty is a member of the Redevelopment
Agency~ and if so, why he doesn't attend the meetings.
City Attorney Oberholzer responded that there has been a rul-
ing made that there is a conflict because Mr. Ratty owns property
downtown.
The Agency heard comments from Mrs. ~4artha Walters regarding
certain environmental issues that relate to the Galleria Project,
and responses were given by various members of the Agency and staff.
Mr. Wal'ters also questioned the Agency and staff on various issues
concerning the proposed Galleria Project. Mrs. Walters asked if
the final decisions on the Galleria Project could be delayed for
a certain period following the Public Hearing of October 18, 1983
to allow the people who attend the Hearing time to contact their
elected representatives and offer their opinions.
Chairman Barton respondea that the issue should be brought
up at the October 18, 1983 Public Hearing.
~rs. Walters questioned the Agency as to whether or not the
15-month option to the developer affords the developer an oppor-
tunity to continue, regardless of the outcome of the agreement, to
have the 15 months to interest others to perform something we don't
agree to or is it possible that other proposals can be submitted
for consideration, but no action taken before the 15-month option
is up and after the October 18th date (depending on the outcome),
could other proposals be considered. Mrs. Walters also asked
about what the criteria is for the individual land selection for
the cifferent phases so that perhaps the ~]erchants and city pro-
percy owners could have some idea of what particular areas are going
· i~c ]3e affected.
~rs. %~alters verified ~..~[~ staff that the property for the
~irst phase of ~ne Galle~-i~. ~zoject would be acquired by Moreland
Corporation for $I. ~[rs. ii,alters questioned whether the closure
cf Eye Street would affect the response time of the Police Depart-
~nent to certain p~3ts of downtown and if it was addressed in the
EIR.
Agency Member Christensen asked staff who did the EIR.
[{r. Xennon responded that it was a team of consultants com-
prised of QUAD, Barton-Aschman and Martin Wiel.
Agency Member Christensen stated that the reason why he asked
was that he did not remember %he EIR addressing that aspect of 'the
closure of Eye Street and that it sounds very log4cal to him. Mr.
- 5 -
Christensen also questioned the materials to be used in the pro-
posed building.
[~r. Kennon stated that the reflective qualities of the material
to be used on 'the proposed building were addressed in the EIR and
as a mitigation measure in the Development Standards of the DDA.
The developer is required to use a light absorbent type of material.
It was also indicated that all impacts upon the circulation patterns
in the downtown were discussed in detail and it was determined 'that
the closure of Eye Street would not have a negative impact on down-
town circulation.
The Agency also heard comments from Mrs. Elizabeth Van Alstyne.
Mrs. Van Alstyne asked who makes up the Agency; appointed members
or the City Council? She also questioned when the change took
place.
Agency members replied that the City Council has been ~he
Redevelopment Agency since last December.
~rs. Van Alstyne wished to know why it is called the Redevelop-
ment Agency when it is the City Council.
Chairman Barton answered that the Agency
Sta~e Redevelopment Laws and operates under a
rules and laws than the City Council.
has -to operate under
different set of
City Ah2orney Oberholzer verified Chairman Barton's answer
and stayed that the powers of hhe Redevelopment ~gency are differ-
ent from the City Council. Redevelopment law states that Redevelop-
ment Agency members may be appointed or may be 'the City Council
memoers. The majority of cities in the country are functionin9
with the City Council members as the Redevelopment Agency members.
Mrs. Van Alstyne questioned staff as ~o where she could find
the law.
City Attorney Oberholzer replied that it is found in 'the
Health aad Safety Code part of Community Develop~ent Law, in
Section 33000.
lirs. Van i lstyne asked if the new Butterfield Savings building
would be part of the proposed Galleria Project.
l~r. Kelmar responded that it would.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Redevelopment
Agency, ~]r. Christensen made a motion to adjourn the meeting at
5:55 p.m.
'A~ES J. B~TON.~ Chairma~
B~akersfield RedeYelopmenc Agency
~'~. D. ~W~NBOi~i, ~R.~/~ecreLary
Baker~f~6~d Redevelop~c Agency