Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11062001 - C.201 Contra Cosa TO:. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/BOARD OF SUPERVISOR •VCouniy FROM: John Sweeten Executive Director DATE: November 6, 2001 SUBJECT: Rodeo Downtown/Waterfront Strategic Plan SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS ACCEPT the report of the Rodeo Downtown/Waterfront Task Force on its strategic planning process, as recommended by the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council; ACKNOWLEDGE the contributions of the Task Force members and the volunteer resource people who gave freely of their time and expertise; and AUTHORIZE the Director of Community Development to initiate a process to amend the Rodeo Downtown/Waterfront Specific Plan as suggested. FISCAL IMPACT None. No General Funds are involved. The outcome of the Strategic Planning process will be used to program future Rodeo Redevelopment revenues. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _ X_ YES SIGNATURE: Q,bW� -(RECOMMENDATION OF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMM DATION OF AGENCY COMMITTEE —APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF AGEN /bN NwPmhPr h, 20D1 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER ,JeXBOAIT VOTE OF COMMISSIONERS/SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT none ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY )N THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Jim Kennedy BOARD 335-1255 ATTESTED Novemb@r , ?001 oriig: Redevelopment cc: County Administrator's Office JOHN SWEETEN County Counsel AGENCY SECRETARY AND CLERK OF Auditor-Controller THEBO OF Z, ERVISORS Via: Redevelopment RMAC - Rodeo Chamber of Commerce BY DEPUTY W:\Personal\Board Orders and Greenies\Board.RDA.Rodeo DT WF SP.10.26.01.doc BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS Approximately 15 months ago, the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Council (R-MAC) authorized the creation of a Task Force to undertake an evaluation and a strategic planning process of the current setting and future opportunities in the Rodeo Downtown/Waterfront. I am pleased to provide the Final Report and recommendations of the Task Force and RMAC. The Task Force and R-MAC view this report to be a work in progress and suggests that the Task Force remain in place to provide an ongoing forum for discussing implementation activities. The thirteen (13) major Task Force recommendations are as follows: 1. The Task Force believes that the current code enforcement program developed by RMAC is adequate and no action regarding a comprehensive code enforcement program is recommended. 2. That the Redevelopment Agency contract with the County Public Works Department to begin planning the replacement of the Pacific Avenue bridge as a County capital improvements project and develop a preliminary cost estimate. 3. That the County staff initiate the P-1 rezoning process for the Rodeo Redevelopment Area as soon as possible and include "Master Use Permits"for the downtown and waterfront as part of the process. 4. That the County staff review the entitlement process and see if there are further efficiencies in the process that can be obtained. 5. That the County staff consider forming project review teams on an as needed basis to expedite processing of specific development proposals. Such teams would consist of Planning, Building, Engineering, and Redevelopment personnel. 6. That the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency pursue a cooperative effort between the Agency, East Bay Regional Parks District, and the property owners to achieve as many,of the goals and objectives as possible of.the East Bay Regional Parks District, the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency, and the Rodeo Community as outlined in "Option 3" above, specifically to work with the District to see if they would commit to an active waterfront program. 7. Achieve as much financial leverage as possible by strategically employing Redevelopment Agency Resources to obtain or expand other private or public dollars. 8. Proceed with "up front"testing as appropriate, particularly as testing can be utilized to determine feasible land uses. 9. That the Redevelopment Agency extends the power of eminent domain. 10. That the Redevelopment Agency pursue the initiation of residential/mixed use projects in the downtown on the listed potential development sites by meeting with the property owners of Site 1, Site 2, Site 3, and Site 6 to determine their interest in pursuing a development/redevelopment project. 11. That the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency pursue the concept of a small business incubator for artists and artisans in Rodeo. 12. That the Downtown/Waterfront Task Force continue for the purpose of advising RMAC on strategic planning implementation efforts and that additional members be appointed. %IVAPersonai\Board Orders and Greenies\Board.RDA.Rodeo DT WF SP.10.26.01.doc 13. That the County initiate an amendment to the "Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan" adopted August 12, 1997 to delete residential parcels west of Pacific Avenue and north of 2"d Street from the area of the Specific Plan (see map 1 attached).' .Staff wishes to acknowledge the contribution of the Task Force members, including: Rich Delany (RMAC) Pedro Ferrer (RMAC) Tony Jensen (RMAC) Ashur Yoseph (RMAC) C.J. Bastiaen (Chamber of Commerce) Shirley Moirano (Chamber of Commerce) Helen Wheeler (Chamber of Commerce) Diane Leite (R-10 Advisory Committee) The contribution of the volunteer resource people who gave so freely of their time and expertise is also to be acknowledged. They include: Laura London, Lennar Corporation, San Ramon Thomas Hogan, Westrec Marinas, Encino Kevin Wakelin, Holliday Development, Emeryville Tom Moseley, Salt River Construction, Tiburon Todd Olson, The Olson Company, Seal Beach Russell Mecham, California Center for Land Recycling (CCLR), San Francisco Frank Cannizzaro, Engineering Consultant, San Francisco Scott Carlson, Forrest City Development, Los Angeles John Baucke, The Bixby Company, Santa Barbara The Agency was assisted in the process by Bill Reeds, Bill Reeds Consulting in Oakland. His insights and research capabilities were invaluable to the Task Force. 1 This recommendation is in response to concerns expressed by "Old Town Rodeo Homeowners and Residents" in a letter and verbally during Task Force meetings, but is not related to the Strategic Planning process. Residents perceived that the fact that single family homes were included within the boundary of the Specific Plan would have some negative impact on their property. It was explained that the location of the Specific Plan boundary had no effect, positive or negative, on the properties and that an amendment could serve no meaningful purpose. However,the residents still expressed a desire to have the boundary modified and the Task force concurred. W:\Personal\Board Orders and Greenies\Board.RDA.Rodeo DT WF SPA0.26.01.doc rD -0 CLCD 0 3 CD = i X. c<D ° a En —I -u m m —1 CD O [� o s r. o, m n�, �° o a D CL CD S n = .-. 0 Co CD 3 o o � n, 0- 3 D z 3 co, CD Da ° 70 � w :� < ° o Z D CL CD ? CD C F' CD a) ,r -� m 0 W co CD In 0 7 S CSm CL D cn D �..� O S O O N n 'Cf CD c CD D U3 `" W CL O 7 n S < (D S CD O n C <. CD CD [U .moi N 'O n Z 7 a _ ,+ N -D �O D <n o m m S 7 S CD CL O CD cn CD o - =3 in' -G LUp Gr.prre.:P.rk.r A A-t" P.c,t H.A. I 9 rA I � N�.1�^•I.nY• 6 I 2 pt Ft M r{.Ilif Ave N O O v ` m CD CD b cr 1 P p.n.rfon AvnY � � Co 3 rn S N n _ v 0 a' b _ \ �'�••� O(71 S UA.Av.r•Y• V ti ea CD a r�0 Avnuo Q� CD CD Q Averwr• \ O . ° C~q03 CD 0• A / P.ry.H Avant• a N 0 P.rk•r AY.nve u• 5 CD V P+ i o 0 9 r'O1j Y•nY. T. Y.^ L i ttrr 0 N• � w f"f' r4nu• O O •N�r�f•J � � u��rn van.,. •rens - n0 E o RODEO DOWNTOWN/WATERFRONT TASK FORCE FINAL REPORT STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS PREPARED BY BILL REEDS,PLANNING CONSULTANT INTRODUCTION The goal of the strategic planning process for the Rodeo community is to determine where it wants to be with respect to its waterfront and downtown and how it will get there. Strategic Planning, in general, is a process for identifying logical links between what a community wants to be and the resources available to get there over a relatively short time frame such as two to four years. The strategic planning process in Rodeo was designed to provide balanced information to the Downtown/Waterfront Task Force and to contribute expert advice on ways to restore economic stability to Rodeo's downtown and waterfront. The key participants in the process have been the Task Force along with volunteers from the development industry and a non-profit agency who have prior experience in urban revitalization and waterfront settings. The strategic planning process for the Rodeo downtown and waterfront included the following steps as outlined at the beginning of the process: 1. Basic research and mapping of the downtown and waterfront; Identification of- issues that present implementation opportunities and constraints to include an evaluation of current conditions, including land use, infrastructure, economic, hazardous materials, and institutional elements, particularly the identification of the various regulatory agency requirements affecting the waterfront; and preparation of a base resource document. 2. Downtown/Waterfront Task Force reconnaissance of the area with volunteers from the development community and a non-profit agency who have urban revitalization and/or waterfront/ marina development experience. 3. Identification of alternative approaches to undertaking revitalization efforts, including land assemblage, land acquisition/disposition strategies, infrastructure improvements, institutional/organizational arrangements, and alternative approaches to financing the work. 4. Evaluating the potential to reuse existing buildings. 5. Analyzing the compatibility of current regulations with real estate market conditions, including possible amendments to the adopted County General Plan, the Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan, the Redevelopment Plan and related Implementation Plan, and County implementing ordinances and procedures. 6. Downtown/Waterfront Task Force to develop list of specific recommendations. The Base Resource Document noted in Step 1 was prepared and titled "Rodeo Downtown/Waterfront Strategic Planning Process - Background Information." This document was distributed to the Task Force and volunteers from the development community who participated in a one-day workshop that was held on February 15. Numerous copies have also been given to interested citizens. Steps 2,3,4, and 5 were accomplished through the workshop, which was an important step in the strategic planning process. By giving the Downtown/Waterfront Task Force the opportunity to talk to and hear directly from members of the development community, a better understanding of what developers look for and how they view the opportunities and constraints in Rodeo was meaningful. The resource people were excellent, and their effort and participation in the workshop was greatly appreciated. Following the workshop the Rodeo Downtown/Waterfront Task Force met three times, March 28`h, April 23RD, and May 23`d, to consider the input received at the workshop and to develop recommendations. This report summarizes the results of the workshop and presents the consultant and task force recommendations in five sections as follows: • OVERVIEW. • GENERAL ASSESSMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS IN THE RODEO DOWNTOWN AND WATERFRONT. • ASSISTANCE NECESSARY FOR DEVELOPERS TO BE INTERESTED IN DEVELOPING OR REDEVELOPING SITES IN THE RODEO DOWNTOWN AND WATERFRONT. • SUMMARY LISTING OF TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS. • CONCLUSION. OVERVIEW The workshop brought together the Rodeo Downtown/Waterfront Task Force and resource people from the development industry. Members of the Rodeo Municipal Advisory Committee (RMAC), Rodeo Chamber of Commerce, and over twenty-five interested Rodeo Citizens were also present. 2 The goal of the workshop was to solicit responses from the resource people on two basic questions: 1. What is your general assessment of the development opportunities and constraints in the Rodeo downtown and at the Rodeo waterfront? 2. What assistance, if any, would be necessary for developers to be interested in developing or redeveloping sites in the Rodeo downtown and waterfront? After considering the responses by the resource people to these two questions Costa County, its Redevelopment Agency, and the Rodeo Community then have to answer a third question: 3. Are Contra Costa County, its Redevelopment Agency, and the Rodeo community in a position to deliver the necessary assistance? Development professionals who volunteered their time and acted as resource people at the workshop included the following: Laura London Lennar Corporation San Ramon Lennar Corporation, founded in 1954, is a publicly traded company and one of the largest homebuilders in the United States. Current Bay area projects include Mare Island in Vallejo, Vintner's Green and Kristopher Ranch in Livermore, Ashford Place in Union City, Pageantry in San Jose, and Orchard Park in Hayward. Thomas Hogan Westrec Marinas Encino Westrec Marinas is the world's largest operator of marinas and marine- related businesses. Westrec operates thirty marinas throughout the United States including the Martinez, Emeryville, and Richmond. Westrec is currently working on the redevelopment of twelve marinas. Kevin Wakelin Holliday Development Emeryville Holliday Development is a small, innovative company specializing in adaptive re-use, live-work, high-density infill, and smart-growth projects. Holliday Development has won numerous awards and takes pride in being "ahead of the curve" in terms of identifying new markets. They were the first company to deliver New York inspired lofts to San Francisco. 3 Notable projects include the Clock Tower lofts in San Francisco and the Emeryville Warehouse lofts. Tom Moseley Salt River Construction Tiburon Salt River.Construction is a small construction company that also owns and operates Paradise Key Marina in Marin County. Mr. Moseley has had a long time interest in the Rodeo Marina. Todd Olson The Olson Company Seal Beach (Northern California Office in San Ramon) The Olson Company specializes in creative infill housing including urban downtown living, transit-oriented housing, neighborhood revitalization, urban master planning, affordable housing, and shopkeeper.homes. The Olson Company was awarded the "2000 Builder of the Year" honor by the National Homebuilder's Association. Russell Mecham California Center for Land Recycling (CCLR) San Francisco CCLR is a statewide nonprofit organization that encourages the development of "brownfields"' through provision of a range of consulting and advisory services, small grants, and other resources to public agencies, developers, community organizations, lenders and regulators Frank Cannizzaro2 Engineering Consultant San Francisco Mr. Cannizzaro .was formerly with the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency and managed master planning, feasibility studies, design, obtaining BCDC and Corps of Engineers permits, financing, construction, and operation of South Beach Harbor, a 700 berth small boat facility. Scott Carlson Forrest City Development Los Angeles (Forrest City also has a San Francisco office) Forrest City, headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio, is one of the largest developers in the country with nearly 200 retail, office, residential, and hotel properties in 21 states. Forrest City is currently working on projects in Oakland and Richmond in the Bay area. � "Brownfield"sites are sites that are contaminated or perceived to be contaminated. 2 Mr. Cannizzaro visited and provided input on the Rodeo waterfront and marina, but was unable to attend the workshop. 4 John Baucke The Bixby Company Santa Barbara The Bixby Company is the development subsidiary of the Bixby Ranch company, one of the oldest land holding companies going back.to the days of the Spanish land grants. The Bixby Company typically operates as a master developer and specializes in "new urbanism" projects and development of "brownfield" sites. The company has worked on a wide variety of developments including office parks, retail, industrial, golf courses, and residential, excluding single family detached. The Bixby Company is working on several projects in Southern California. Their first project in Northern California is in Hercules. GENERAL ASSESSMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS IN THE RODEO DOWNTOWN AND WATERFRONT This section contains a summary of the responses to the first question, "What is your general assessment of the development opportunities and constraints in the Rodeo downtown and at the Rodeo waterfront?" With regard to downtown Rodeo the resource people were generally very positive about the development opportunities. Laura London said that it was not difficult to imagine construction of new attractive homes in Rodeo. However, she also emphasized the need for public money to attract developers noting that they wouldn't come on their own initiative. Todd Olson said that there are a lot of different development opportunities and that the best development opportunities appeared to be single family attached housing and live- work units. He suggested that smaller projects could be built at scattered locations. John Baucke thought that the supply of commercial land area needed to be reduced, which would allow room for additional residential development. Thomas Hogan believes that the I-80 corridor is booming citing the fact that 2.5 million square feet of office is going in Richmond. He thinks the corridor is a major attraction. Laura London suggested that new technology creates opportunities for people to live independent of where the companies they work for are located which is a positive for Rodeo. She said that it would be a big plus if there were fiber optic cable located in the railroad right-of-way and noted that the freeway access is an important asset. The resource people were also positive about the marina, but everyone that addressed the marina suggested the need for public assistance if revitalization of the marina were to become a reality. John Baucke suggested that revitalization of the marina could be a stimulus for the downtown. He said that synergy between the downtown and waterfront needs to be created. He noted that Rodeo has a town core, which many cities don't have. 5 Laura London said that East Bay Regional Parks District ownership of the property . wouldn't be as attractive as having an active marina. Thomas Hogan believes that an active marina brings people into town. He indicated marina occupancy rates and rental rates are increasing. Scott Carlson noted that there was potential but that assistance would be required. Tom Moseley was very positive about the Rodeo marina and indicated that the positives are good location, good protection, and good public access. He said that he likes the marina and that it definitely has potential. Moseley believes that the marina could accommodate 300 berths along with dry storage, and a launch ramp. Along a similarline of thought, Thomas Hogan said that the marina should be an activity center with a lot of different types of uses going on. He felt that boat sales and dry storage were important uses. He thought the Joseph's site would be a good location for a boat launch and dry boat storage, although he said that boat launches don't generate any significant revenue. Frank Cannizzaro agreed with Moseley and Hogan saying that the redevelopment of the marina will have to include income-generating uses. A "destination" has to be created. Uses need to include boat dry storage; small boat sales, repair, and parts; restaurants; and other facilities for boaters. He believes the market needs to be clearly defined. From looking at the marina he thought the market was probably for boats up to 30 feet with the majority in the 20-foot range. Thomas Hogan believes that a developer revitalizing the marina would have to work with the existing marina configuration due to permitting issues. Tom Moseley generally agreed and thought that BCDC would require "shaping up" the breakwater. The issue of dredging was discussed. Thomas Hogan said that he believed it would take a year to get a permit to dredge. Dredging typically isn't allowed from January to June. He said that dredging costs approximately $10 to $12 per cubic yard. Tom Moseley gave a much wider range of costs indicating that dredging costs $8 to $100 per yard depending on requirements for disposing of dredge materials and how toxic materials have to be handled. He said that trying to estimate dredging costs without testing, which has not been done, was like "shooting in the dark." Russell Mecham indicated that assistance for clean up may be available through provisions of Polanco Act. ASSISTANCE NECESSARY FOR DEVELOPERS TO BE INTERESTED IN DEVELOPING OR REDEVELOPING SITES IN THE RODEO DOWNTOWN AND WATERFRONT This section combines a summary of the responses of the resource people to the second question, "What assistance, if any, would be necessary for developers to be interested in developing or redeveloping sites in the Rodeo downtown and at the waterfront?" with a discussion of those responses and a recommendation regarding the third question, "Are Contra Costa County and the Rodeo community in a position to deliver the necessary assistance?" 6 The resource people outlined five basic forms of public assistance that they believed they or other developers would need in order to look seriously at Rodeo: • General Enhancement of Rodeo's Physical Appearance and Image. • Public Improvements. • Speed, Simplicity, and Certainty in the Entitlement Process. • "Up Front" Testing of the Soil and Water at the Marina. • Land Assembly. By way of review, the seven major forms of redevelopment agency development assistance are: • Land assembly and write-down. • Construction of public improvements. • Site preparation. • Tax exempt bond financing assistance. • Development loans and grants. • Toxic remediation. • Seismic rehabilitation. The assistance that would be necessary for developers to be interested in developing or redeveloping sites in the Rodeo downtown and at the waterfront outlined at the workshop by the resource people could involve all seven forms and at a minimum probably involves five of the seven. Assistance of the type outlined at the workshop is not unusual, excessive, or uncommon in redevelopment areas. Providing these forms of assistance to eliminate blight are the basic reasons redevelopment programs exist. However, the assistance requested does have significant cost, resource allocation, and opportunity cost considerations for the Redevelopment Agency and will have to be carefully evaluated. The paragraphs that follow contain a summary of the input provided by the resource people on each of the areas of needed public assistance and a discussion of and recommendations on the input. General Enhancement of Rodeo's Physical Appearance and Image Input Laura London suggested that it is important to create a sense of"town feel," "character," and "identity." She also suggested that a positive visual image of Rodeo needs to be created. She thought that this could "pull it all together" in terms of attracting developers. 7 Thomas Hogan agreed saying that the downtown needs "curb appeal' and that the marina had an even worse appearance. He was essentially talking about a code enforcement and "cleanup, paint up, fix up" effort. There was discussion regarding the need for a general renovation effort in the downtown. Frank Cannizzaro also thought that the general aesthetics of Rodeo needed to be addressed to attract developers and customers, and that the area needs to be cleaned up. He suggested removing existing blighting conditions — boats, buildings; vehicles- in marina area. Discussion The Parker Avenue improvements, scheduled to begin construction in the spring 2002, will significantly enhance the visual appearance of downtown Rodeo. The improvements include narrowing the street and constructing a landscaped center median, streetscape enhancement, and utility undergrounding. These improvements will make the downtown more attractive to developers. In addition, construction will begin in the very near future on a new senior citizens housing project, which will enhance the southern entrance to the community. A major code compliance/enforcement effort could significantly improve the visual appearance of downtown Rodeo. Such a program in Rodeo should focus on inoperable vehicles,junk, signs, trash, rubbish, and litter. Code enforcement/ compliance programs require significant planning and effort. The best programs include a voluntary compliance effort, are well publicized, publicized well in advance, stress the positive aspects of the effort, use a phased approach, and combine public sector and private sector effort. A suggested approach for Rodeo is as follows: Phase I: Begin by focusing on a voluntary, community-wide junklinoperable vehicle removal effort. The Rodeo Chamber of Commerce, working with a charitable organization that offers income tax benefits to vehicle donors, could sponsor a short- term (two or three weekend) effort where people voluntarily turn in their inoperable vehicles. Phase II: Schedule a community-wide clean-up effort and event over one weekend. The Chamber and/or the RMAC, working with County staff and the trash service provider for the Rodeo community, could sponsor the effort. Typically, large trash bins are placed at a central location(s), and citizens bring their trash and rubbish to the locations. Volunteers need to monitor the sites. Ideally, volunteers can also assist with the clean up of problem properties at the request of the property owner. Sometimes there is entertainment and activities for children. Phase III: County conducts the formal code compliance effort for the code violations 8 that remain. If a code enforcement effort is initiated in Rodeo, it should be timed so that the voluntary phase takes place before and during the Parker Avenue reconstruction with the formal enforcement effort to begin following construction of the Parker Avenue improvements. It would not appear to be a priority to include the marina area in the initial code enforcement effort. If the properties are sold, it is probable that the property would be cleaned up with the change in ownership. Consultant Recommendation That the County plan and implement a comprehensive code enforcement program as outlined above in downtown Rodeo including Parker Avenue between the downtown and I-80 and that the Redevelopment Agency continue to support this effort as appropriate. Task Force Recommendation No action is recommended. The Task Force believes that the current code enforcement program developed by RMAC is adequate. A newsletter on code enforcement is scheduled in May and a community cleanup sponsored by the Rodeo. Chamber of Commerce is scheduled. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS Input With regard to public improvements Scott Carlson suggested that Parker Avenue has to be "tamed" and that the physical environment has to be nurtured. Todd Olson suggested that there needs to be public enhancements such as art and landscaping. Frank Cannizzaro stated that accessibility to the marina area needs to be improved. He felt that rebuilding Pacific Avenue bridge over the railroad tracks would be a very positive step. On the walking tour that took place as a part of the workshop, others also suggested rebuilding the bridge. Discussion The Parker Avenue improvements are funded and will take place representing a major effort and a major improvement. There is general consensus that the Pacific Avenue bridge over the railroad tracks will have to be replaced or substantially upgraded. It is not designed to current seismic standards and is too narrow for safe vehicle and pedestrian access. However, replacement of the bridge is a priority only if an active marina area is developed. If the Parks District purchases the marina, the responsibility for improving the access would fall primarily to the District. The Redevelopment Agency may provide a small portion of such funding. This premise is based on the belief 9 that East Bay regional Parks District is likely to employ a fairly passive land use program for the waterfront. Unless passive uses predominate, it makes sense for the County Public Works Department to begin planning the replacement of the bridge as a County capital improvement project and to develop a preliminary cost estimate. The cost of the bridge replacement is a significant component in the overall cost of a marina purchase. Consultant Recommendation That the Redevelopment Agency contract with the County Public Works Department to begin planning the replacement of the Pacific Avenue bridge as a County capital improvements project and develop a preliminary cost estimate. Task Force Recommendation That the Redevelopment Agency contract with the County Public Works Department to begin planning the replacement of the Pacific Avenue bridge as a County capital improvements project and develop a preliminary cost estimate. SPEED, SIMPLICITY, AND CERTAINTY IN THE ENTITLEMENT PROCESS The term "entitlement process" refers to all the discretionary approvals and permits necessary for a developer to begin construction of a project. This might include general plan, specific plan, or redevelopment plan amendment; (land) use permit; and final development plan. For the downtown area all such permits are within the authority of Contra Costa County. The same approvals and permits for property in the marina area also come from Contra Costa County. However, depending on the nature of the proposed development, permits from the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board may also be required in the marina area. The County has very limited ability to expedite the review and approval process of these outside agencies. The resource people at the workshop who were familiar with marina development understand this, although it was not specifically discussed. Input Most of the resource people emphasized the need for speed, simplicity, and certainty in the entitlement process. John Baucke said that there has to be a desire from a regulatory standpoint for mixed-use projects and that regulations have to allow for flexible buildings. He feels that needs to be a regulatory vision and a regulatory plan needs to be developed. He also suggested reducing the risk for developers by satisfying California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements up front. 10 Frank Cannizzaro echoed these statements saying that there needs to be certainty in the development regulations and that as much uncertainty as possible needs to be removed "up front." Todd Olson indicated that speeding up the entitlement process was very important. Discussion Speed, simplicity, and certainty in the entitlement process is an important consideration in attracting developers. Developers like a process where all they have to do is get a building permit if their proposed use is in conformance with zoning requirements. This is the case in many parts of the.Country; but doesn't always result in good projects. It is not the approach typically used in California. In California, use permits and design review are typically required in addition to general plan and zoning conformance. Nevertheless, it is possible to streamline the entitlement process. The County has plans to undertake rezoning the entire redevelopment area, including the downtown and . waterfront, to a Planned Unit Development District (P-1). P-1 is a very flexible zoning and is consistent with the "Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan land use designation for the downtown of"Mixed Use." The County initiated P-1 rezoning, upon approval would eliminate the need for developers of residential, live-work, or mixed use projects in the downtown to initiate a rezoning procedure for their individual projects thus eliminating a step in the entitlement process. This eliminates two to three months from the process. It was also suggested that satisfying California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements "up front" reduce the risk for developers. This is a good suggestion and can be handled as part of the area wide P-1 rezoning. The P-1 rezoning could include "Master Use Permits" for the downtown and the marina, which would contain design standards and provisions for administrative review and approval of individual projects that conform to the Use Permits. The County staff would retain the option to refer projects that require amendments to the standards or, in the opinion of Staff, do not meet the intent of the standards to the County Planning Commission. Consultant Recommendation • That the County staff initiate the P-1 rezoning process for the Rodeo community as soon as possible and include "Master Use Permits" for the downtown and waterfront as part of the process. • That the County staff review the entitlement process and see if there are further efficiencies in the process that can be obtained. 11 Task Force Recommendation • That the County staff initiate the P-1 rezoning process for the Rodeo community as soon as possible and include "Master Use Permits" for the downtown and waterfront as part of the process. • That the County staff review the entitlement process and see if there are further efficiencies in the process that can be obtained. In addition, the Task Force recommends that the County staff consider forming project review teams on an as needed basis to expedite processing of specific development proposals. Such teams would consist of Planning, building, Engineering and Redevelopment Personnel. "UP FRONT" TESTING OF THE SOIL AND WATER AT THE MARINA InRut Tom Moseley, Thomas Hogan, and Frank Cannizzaro all suggested that the Redevelopment Agency perform "front end" testing including sounding, soil test, and salinity testing. Their estimated cost for this testing was $25,000 to $50,000. In addition to the testing, Cannizzaro suggested that a Phase I and Phase 11 environmental analysis, boundary survey, boundary map, and contour mapping be completed for both sites. Discussion How testing is handled will depend on if and how the property is sold. Up front testing would no doubt assist in the sale and development of the marina properties if the properties were to be sold to a private sector developer, particularly if sold for active marina uses. Unfortunately, as noted below, there is no evidence that a private sector developer can purchase and develop the property for active marina uses without public sector assistance. As a practical matter, if the Agency or the East Bay Regional Parks District decides to pursue purchase of the marina, "up-front" testing and environmental analysis is a necessity. Testing requires permission of the property owners who may or may not be agreeable. However, the testing will have to be done eventually if the land is to be sold. If and when testing is done, it should be done in accordance with all applicable standards of BCDC and the other permitting and reviewing agencies. In addition to the studies listed above a biological survey would also be necessary to meet State Department of Fish and Game requirements. Comprehensive testing and environmental analysis could cost in excess of$200,000, but the test results will have a significant effect on the sale of the properties. 12 Consultant Recommendation How testing is handled is dependent on issues outlined in the "Land Assembly" section that follows. Therefore, a recommendation is not made on this issue. Task Force Recommendation How testing is handled is dependent on issues outlined in the "Land Assembly" section that follows. Therefore, a recommendation is not made on this issue. LAND ASSEMBLY Input Almost all the resource people mentioned land assembly, either in the downtown or at the marina, as being critical. Todd Olson said that downtown development sites are small and need to be consolidated and that development feasibility comes down to being able to acquire sites. There appeared to be general concurrence among the resource people with this opinion, but most of the discussion concerned the marina. Thomas Hogan said that for a project to be successful at the marina, land has to be assembled. He indicated that Westrec would not be interested in buying the properties without public assistance. Tom Moseley also indicated that he would need public assistance for the marina to work economically. He also said that there would need to be participation in the dredging costs. Frank Cannizzaro said that he believes that the land would need to be assembled or an agreement to assemble land would need to be in place to attract developers. Laura London and John Baucke agreed both saying the question of ownership of the land in the marina has to be addressed as a high priority. Discussion took place regarding the silting condition and the need to take action in the near future so that the silting condition does not get worse that the marina does not become a salt marsh. Discussion re: Waterfront and Marina The "Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan" contains a number of strategies intended to achieve an outcome of an active, fully revitalized marina. Information obtained from several sources during the preliminary research for the Rodeo strategic planning process raised the question of whether or not it was economically feasible to achieve revitalization without a major public subsidy. Three major issues were identified: • The capital cost of dredging and ongoing dredging costs. • The size of the existing marina area. • The capital cost of reconstructing the marina. 13 Based on discussion by the resource people at the workshop it appears that the County Redevelopment Agency would need to purchase the Bennett's and Joseph's sites and then sell the properties to a private sector developer if the goal of an active marina is to be realized. A substantial "write-down"3 of the land cost is likely to be needed. This input confirms the conclusion reached during the preliminary phases of the strategic planning process, which is that redevelopment of the waterfront as active marina is not economically feasible without major public sector financial assistance. Land assembly by a public agency is an expensive proposition, even if the power of eminent domain is not used. Property acquisition under California Redevelopment Law as well as applicable State and Federal environmental laws is complex, time consuming, and expensive. There are numerous costs in addition to the cost of the land. These costs include the testing, environmental, and other "up front" costs outlined above; any toxic remediation required based on the testing; relocation of existing businesses as required by California Redevelopment Law; and legal costs. There are too many unknowns to develop a cost estimate for acquisition of the marina properties. However, it is clear that the cost would be several million dollars, which is beyond the financial capability of the Redevelopment Agency. Unfortunately, the conclusion is that an active, fully revitalized marina as outlined in the Specific Plan is not economically feasible. The question then becomes how much of that goal can be achieved. The report titled "Rodeo Waterfront and Marina Issues and Opportunities," states that the key policy question that has become apparent during the preliminary investigation of the options for the future of the marina and waterfront area is ownership of the Joseph's Resort and Bennett's Marina properties. The report also outlines and discusses four ownership and development options: • Retention of ownership by the current or new private sector owners without public sector intervention. • East Bay Regional Parks District ownership of both properties. • East Bay Regional Parks District ownership of one of the properties or a portion of one or both of the properties with the remainder of the property to be redeveloped by the private sector. • Ownership of both properties by the private sector with redevelopment through a public/private partnership. 3 The cost of assembling land for redevelopment projects always exceeds the market value of the assembled land. This is due to the fact that small parcels typically have a higher per square foot value or cost than larger parcels, and the parcels being acquired typically have buildings, improvements, and businesses for which a property or business owner must be compensated under California Redevelopment Law. The term, "write-down," refers to the difference between the total amount an agency" pays for land and the amount derived from the subsequent sale or lease of the land. 14 The input at the workshop and the answer to the economic feasibility question has caused modification of this original group of options and leads to a revised group of options which are as follows: Option 1 Retention of ownership by the current or new private sector owners without public sector intervention This option is essentially the same as it has been. The current property owners could keep their properties or sell them to a private sector developer. It is highly improbable that the properties could be sold for uses that are not marina related. However, commercial uses could be developed on the sites. This option is unlikely to accomplish any of the objectives of the "Specific Plan". Option 2 East Bay Regional Parks District ownership of both properties This option is unchanged. Purchase of both properties by the East Bay Regional Parks District is still an option with the positives and negatives stated in the prior report remaining valid. The key point is still that this option does not accomplish the goal of an active, revitalized marina. Option 3 Pursue a cooperative effort between the East Bay Regional Parks District, the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency, and the property owners to achieve as many of the goals and objectives as possible of all three entities and the community This option is essentially a combination of the previous Option 3 and Option 4. The concept is to prepare a detailed site plan defining the area to be purchased by the East Bay Regional Parks District for open space and recreation purposes and the area of the property to be reserved for sale for commercial purposes. The key would be to work with the District to see if they would commit to operating a more.active waterfront program than has been their history or if they would be willing to contract for the operation of a more active waterfront program. Possible water related uses include a boat ramp, fishing pier, dry boat storage, restaurants, bait shop, windsurfing, etc. As previously noted a new boat ramp would still require dredging. However, the amount of dredging would be limited to a channel to deep water thus significantly decreasing dredging costs. Loans and grants are available from the State for construction of a boat ramp as well as a fishing pier. The Task Force's order of preference is Option 3, then Option 2, and then Option 1. With any of the options it will be necessary to amend the "Rodeo/Downtown Specific Plan" to conform to the direction chosen. 15 Discussion re: Downtown Assembly of sites in the downtown may be less complicated and less expensive although a "write-down" of land costs is still likely to be needed. Revitalization of the downtown will, in all probability, begin with the introduction of new residential types, such as live- work, into the downtown. It is important to get a project started in the downtown to generate interest among other developers: To do so, follow up meetings are recommended with the resource people to get their views on which sites offer the most potential for redevelopment and what type of development is the most feasible on those sites. The next step is to meet with the applicable property owners to determine their interest. Once this occurs project concepts can be put together and the Request for Proposal (RFP) process described in the background material can be followed. It is also possible for property owners to develop their property themselves or sell their property directly to a developer without Redevelopment agency involvement. It would be desirable to get at least two projects under way. Hopefully two new projects, along with the senior housing project and the approved live-work project can begin to create an impetuous for new non-residential development in the downtown as well as filling existing available space with quality businesses. Discussion re: Eminent Domain A public agency's ability to assemble land is greatly dependent on the power of eminent domain. Eminent domain is the power of a public agency to take private property if the taking is for a public purpose and if just compensation is paid. The power of eminent domain is critical to the ability of an agency to assemble sites whether or not the condemnation process is actually used. The Redevelopment Agency's power of eminent domain expires in approximately a year and a half. It is essential that the Redevelopment Agency extend it's power of eminent domain, which it can do in twelve year increments, in order to be able to successfully assemble sites in the downtown or the marina. Consultant Recommendations • That the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency pursue a cooperative effort between the Agency, East Bay Regional Parks District, and the property owners to achieve as many of the goals and objectives as possible of all three entities and the community as outlined in "Option 3" above. • Proceed with "up front" testing as appropriate. • That the Redevelopment Agency pursue the initiation of residential/mixed use projects in the downtown as outlined above 16 • That the Redevelopment Agency extends the power of eminent domain. Additional Information At the April 23RD Task Force Meeting, the Task Force considered and accepted a report on eminent domain including the power of eminent domain and when it can be used, eminent domain procedures, "just compensation" for taking of property, and the importance of the power of eminent domain for redevelopment purposes. The "Rodeo Downtown/Waterfront Strategic Planning Process-Background Information" notebook that was distributed prior to the February 15 Task Force Workshop contains a discussion of five sites along Parker Avenue that have the potential for Redevelopment (Tab 5). Generalized maps of the five sites were included. Further review of potential sites has taken, and three sites were added for the Task Force's consideration. Site Maps and descriptions of the eight sites are included on the following pages. The Task Force discussed each site and made recommendations on each of the sites as set forth. The importance of the artist community in Rodeo was discussed during the strategic planning process. Artists are being forced out of the South of Market area in San Francisco and out of Emeryville due to high rents and conversion of artists spaces to higher cost residential types. There is an existing artist community in Rodeo and expansion of the artist community appears to be a market niche for Rodeo. Rodeo has buildings with strong character suitable for use by artists/artisans and the potential for suitable new construction. The concept of a small business incubator in Rodeo for artists and artisans was introduced.at the April 23RD Task Force meeting for the Task Force's consideration. An example of this concept exists in Santa Fe, New Mexico. The project in Santa Fe was developed to respond to the special needs of the artist's niche. The design permits flexible use if tenant space, including light industrial, studio, office, retail, and residential uses. The concept offers tenants the ability to minimize overhead through cooperative advertising and shared office services. Information on small business incubators generally, artists/artisan incubators specifically, and the Santa Fe Program was distributed to the Task Force. The Task Force also discussed whether or not they should "sunset" or continue for the purpose of advising RMAC on strategic planning implementation efforts. The Task Force determined that they should continue, but also noted that additional members would need to be appointed. 17 SITE NUMBER 1 CURRENT USES-GROCERY STORE SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION - MIXED USE ZONING DESIGNATION -RETAIL BUSINESS POSSIBLE USES - LIVE/WORK, SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL, OFFICE, RETAIL, MIXED USE COMBINATIONS OF THE ABOVE SITE AREA- 1.56 ACRES NOTES-WIDE RIGHTS-OF-WAY ON RAILROAD AVENUE ON THE EAST SIDE SECOND STREET OF THE SITE AND INVESTMENT STREET ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE COULD BE NARROWED TO INCREASE THE SIZE OF THE SITE. HOWEVER PARKING NEEDS OF EXISTING BUSINESSES AND PROPERTY OWNERS �'�' €I '•.' €'` `:`:: I` NEED TO BE ACCOMMODATED AS PART OF ANY CONSIDERATION OF STREET :;:::k € i ' ' ' NORTH RECONFIGURATION. APPROPRIATE TRAFFIC AND PARKING STUDIES WOULD : : € € w NEED TO BE CONDUCTED. THE SITE COULD BE A PRIME LOCATION FORA r t' �:�° :':°°:'.:'.:':'°':`::''`''''';'.:':`:'.`'I'` > LIVE WORK DISTRICT. IF THE EXISTING GROCERY STORE IS ECONOMICALLY :•: :•: ti.. p VIABLE, IT MAY BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO ':':':•.::::::::::' Q RELOCATE IT TO THE CORE :I: ::EXISTING? :::: :::: ::::' 0 COMMERCIAL AREA. I :GRC�C J �5T4RE.• 4: :9 c: z LJ.1 OWNERS- SITE NUMBER 1 A PAUL CHONG & "' LAI KING CURRENT USES-3 TO 4 SINGLE FAMILY Q v/.teAIVT::::::: RESIDENCES :::: 37.AC :::, SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION - MIXED USE ZONING DESIGNATION-RETAIL OWNER- BUSINESS ROBERT JOHNSON POSSIBLE USES- LIVE/WORK, SINGLE INVESTMENT ST. FAMILY ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL, OFFICE, RETAIL, MIXED USE COMBINATIONS OF THE ABOVE SITE AREA-.43 ACRESOWNER- . VACANT::: ELWOOD KRONICK NOTES-AS ABOVE. 3 OWNERSHIPS, : ::. r:::;::: AREA OF SITE 1 PLUS SITE 1 A = 1.99 : •.. . . . e�vGc 18 SITE NUMBER 2 NORTH CURRENT USES-A PORTION OF THE SITE IS `J VACANT WITH A CONVENIENCE STORE, CONSTRUCTION STORAGE, SENIOR CENTER AND PARKING ON THE REMAINDER SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION - MIXED USE ZONING DESIGNATION- RETAIL BUSINESS POSSIBLE USES - LIVE/WORK, OFFICE, RETAIL, RESIDENTIAL, AND MIXED USE COMBINATIONS THEREOF. FIRST STREET SITE AREA- 1.3 ACRES NOTES-SENIOR CENTER WOULD HAVE TO BE RELOCATED, EXISTING CONVENIENCE STORE COULD BE RELOCATED SITE NUMBER 2A : : CURRENT USES-SINGLE STORY RETAIL W BUILDINGS SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION - MIXED USE W ZONING DESIGNATION- RETAIL BUSINESS POSSIBLE USES - LIVE/WORK, OFFICE, RETAIL, RESIDENTIAL, AND MIXED USE COMBINATIONS W : :CONVNIVCE SITE AREA- .50 ACRES NOTES-4 OWNERSHIPS. AREA OF SITE 1 PLUS SITE l A = 1.8 ACRES EJOHN - ESSOLO :::: `':':`:• ': ° _ ':' € .? SENIOR::I ? ::° PF OWNER- CONTRA COSTA ' ; € II COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SECOND STREET 19 � v THIRD STREET W .c}} yC Lu Z .:.:'S�©RASE::;:: a YiL7: Y -AC a •- ' - ' - � NORTH SITE NUMBER 3 CURRENT USES-OUTDOOR STORAGE YARD SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION - MIXED USE ZONING DESIGNATION-RETAIL BUSINESS POSSIBLE USES-RETAIL AND OFFICE SITE AREA- .26 ACRES SITE NUMBER 4 NOTES-REDEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE WOULD ELIMINATE AN UNDESIRABLE AND BLIGHTING LAND USE CONDITION AND CURRENT USES-VACANT PROVIDE AN IMPORTANT INFILL SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION - COMMERCIAL USE OUTSIDE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA OWNER-ANITA FISHER GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION- COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION-RETAIL BUSINESS POSSIBLE USES-LIVE/WORK AND FOURTH STREET SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED . . . . . . . . . . . . SITE AREA - .46 ACRES NOTES-SITE HAS GOOD POTENTIAL FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OWNER-FRED & HERMINIA PIERCE u C. e. . . . + 6 20 W Z SITE NUMBER 6 j Q CURRENT USES-VACANT ECCEPT FOR NORTH uj ONE GARAGE SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION - MIXED USE `•v� Q ZONING DESIGNATION- RETAIL BUSINESS a POSSIBLE USES-LIVE/WORK, MULTI-FAMILY, SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED SITE AREA- .23 ACRES FIRST STREET PROPERTY OWNERS-GROSSI LUIS AND DIXIE TRE NOTES-SMALL IRREGULAR SITE Xi TIF. N W Z Lu OWNER _CHARLES Q ALLISON O W 0 U O a: w La OWNER-WILLIAM OWNER-CENTRAL Q NICORA SERVICE SITE NUMBER 5 CURRENT USES-COMMERCIAL AND PARKING SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION - MIXED USE ZONING DESIGNATION-RETAIL BUSINESS POSSIBLE USES-RETAIL AND OFFICE, PREFERABLY A TWO OR THREE STORY BUILDING WITH RETAIL ON GROUND FLOOR SITE AREA - .43 ACRES NOTES-KEY CORNER IN-FILL SITE, IMPORTANT SECOND STREET TO PRESERVE EXISTING BUILDING ON SITE 21 Task Force Recommendation • That the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency pursue a cooperative effort between the Agency, East Bay Regional Parks District, and the property owners to achieve as many of the goals and objectives as possible of all three entities and the community as outlined in "Option 3" above. • Achieve as much financial leverage as possible by strategically employing Redevelopment Agency Resources to obtain or expand other private or public dollars. • Proceed with "up front" testing as appropriate, particularly as testing can be utilized to determine feasible land uses. • That the Redevelopment Agency extends the power of eminent domain. • That the Redevelopment Agency pursue the initiation of residential/mixed use projects in the downtown on the listed potential development sites as follows: Site 1 — Meet with the property owners to determine their interest in pursuing a development/redevelopment project. Site 1A— Take no action on these properties at the present time, as there are numerous residential uses on the properties. Site 2 - Meet with the property owners to determine their interest in pursuing a development/redevelopment project. Site 2A - Take no action on these properties at the present time, as there are several small businesses on the properties. Site 3 - Meet with the property owners to determine their interest in pursuing a development/redevelopment project. Site 4 - Take no action at the present time. A community group (CSA R-10) is exploring the possibility of a public use on the site. Site 5 - Take no action at the present time. The site will be difficult to develop and the existing building is of historic significance. Site 6 - Meet with the property owners to determine their interest in pursuing a development/redevelopment project. This site may be a potential for a small business incubator for artists and artisans. • That the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency pursue the concept of a small business incubator for artists and artisans in Rodeo. 22 • That the Downtown/Waterfront Task Force continue for the purpose of advising RMAC on strategic planning implementation efforts and that additional members be appointed. SUMMARY LISTING OF TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS • The Task Force believes that the current code enforcement program developed by RMAC is adequate and no action regarding a comprehensive code enforcement program is recommended. • That the Redevelopment Agency contract with the County Public Works Department to begin planning the replacement of the Pacific Avenue bridge as a County capital improvements project and develop a preliminary cost estimate. • That the County staff initiate the P-1 rezoning process for the Rodeo Redevelopment Area as soon as possible and include "Master Use Permits" for the downtown and waterfront as part of the process. • That the County staff review the entitlement process and see if there are further efficiencies in the process that can be obtained. • That the County staff consider forming project review teams on an as needed basis to expedite processing of specific development proposals. Such teams would consist of Planning, Building, Engineering, and Redevelopment personnel. • That the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency pursue a cooperative effort between the Agency, East Bay Regional Parks District, and the property owners to achieve as many of the goals and objectives as possible of the East Bay Regional Parks District, the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency, and the Rodeo Community as outlined in "Option 3" above, specifically to work with the District to see if they would commit to an active waterfront program. • Achieve as much financial leverage as possible by strategically employing Redevelopment Agency Resources to obtain or expand other private or public dollars. • Proceed with "up front" testing as appropriate, particularly as testing can be utilized to determine feasible land uses. • That the Redevelopment Agency extends the power of eminent domain. • That the Redevelopment Agency pursue the initiation of residential/mixed use projects in the downtown on the listed potential development sites by meeting with the property owners of Site 1, Site 2, Site 3, and Site 6 to determine their interest in pursuing a development/redevelopment project. 23 • That the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency pursue the concept of a small business incubator for artists and artisans in Rodeo. • That the Downtown/Waterfront Task Force continue for the purpose of advising RMAC on strategic planning implementation efforts and that additional members be appointed. • That the County initiate an amendment to the "Rodeo Waterfront/Downtown Specific Plan" adopted August 12, 1997 to delete residential parcels west of Pacific Avenue and north of 2°d Street from the area of the Specific Plan (see map 1 attached).4 CONCLUSION The Rodeo Downtown/Waterfront Task Force recommendations will be forwarded to RMAC. RMAC will consider the recommendations; make any additions, deletions, or modifications they deem necessary; and forward the recommendations to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors/Redevelopment Agency for their consideration. 4 This recommendation is in response to concerns expressed by"Old Town Rodeo Homeowners and Residents"in a letter and verbally during Task Force meetings, but is not related to the Strategic Planning process. Residents perceived that the fact that single family homes were included within the boundary of the Specific Plan would have some negative impact on their property. It was explained that the location of the Specific Plan boundary had no effect,positive or negative,on the properties and that an amendment could serve no meaningful purpose. However,the residents still expressed a desire to have the boundary modified and the Task force concurred. 24 u 0 CAW ,5urr�o� / MV.n A �fM ` •H y 6. •'t'•4rr . a {,• � Wreb i h I«nsuwr .0 ~Ay word E Murwy nvd (� N W I. Mulvey o•Wtl . MuanY a.'PbH �.T 0 (j) Q' o � rnurwy rtn � Rr IE g�n E ti 0 0 Q) t o o�ur.y uotpurpcu vi �}phC m ro a� C7� o °C6' r'wirny twrN O O Q oI Mur+y w," (•jy 6 VI ' 1' Q ' b ro ` c% otio. c t0 v � o � m ix w O ` -C a Q, yro Q Q 0 3 ro j r Q1 w ro O w ro U o 0 0 0 v o m o ctC)) a 3 o �' � `C m0 ro —1 aU as N a m v f-° oro Q) W c E mQ cc o o a v a act ro Q •