HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03021993 - 2.3 2. 3
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUN'T'Y, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on March 2, 1993 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
(See below for vote)
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SUBJECT: Feasibility of a Redevelopment Project Area
Constituting Only the Buchanan Field Airport
The Board on February 23 , 1993, deferred to this day its
consideration of the reports of the Finance Committee and Internal
Operations Committee and the recommendations contained therein
relative to establishing a Redevelopment Project Area comprised only
of Buchanan Field Airport. (Copies of the reports are attached and
included as a part of this document. )
Following presentation of the reports, Supervisor Powers advised
that the Finance Committee concurs with dropping Pacheco from
inclusion in the Buchanan Field Airport Redevelopment Project Area,
but believes that there may be other options available to the County
that should be explored. He noted that at some point in time the
Airport and areas adjacent to it may lend themselves to redevelopment
and expressed his support for having staff explore these potential
options.
Supervisor Torlakson referred to successful redevelopment
programs in the County. He noted that since Recommendation No. 2 in
the Finance Committee Report appears to be conceptual at this time,
he could support it in that context.
Supervisor McPeak advised that she believes the wise course is
not to pursue any redevelopment that does not involve the Airport.
She expressed the belief that before any staff time is spent in
analyzing this matter further, there should be meetings with the
property owners to the north of the Airport and the Aviation Advisory
Committee.
Supervisor Powers expressed concern with the amount of
missunderstanding on this matter and spoke on the need for long range
planning for this area with redevelopment as a possible consideration
for the future.
Supervisor Bishop advised that she would support it in concept
but cautioned on the amount of time to be spent on its review.
Supervisor Smith advised that he would like to have more
information on this matter and would be supportive of having staff
provide a report at some future time.
Therefore, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the recommendations
of the Finance Committee are APPROVED with staff being requested to
explore conceptually the idea of redevelopment in the Buchanan Field
Airport area and potential cost benefits, to communicate with
interested parties on this proposal, and to report to the Board on
September 21, 1993 . The vote was as follows:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Smith, Bishop, Torlakson
NOES: Supervisor McPeak
ABSENT: None
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Board DIRECTS that the Internal
Operations Committee Report be received and filed and CONCURS that a
Redevelopment Project Area comprised solely of Buchanan field is not
feasible at this time. The vote was as follows:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Smith, Bishop, McPeak, Torlakson
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
hereby curt"y that this is a tf'lJa and correct copy of
an action and entered on the minutes of the
Board of ;i::c::u:ors on 00 data shown.
ATTESY C `�lLie_ 2 r /9 y-3
PHIL .34 T CHELOR,Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
cc: Director, GMEDA
Director, CDD ByQ_�,�.� -� _ _.� ,Deputy
County Administrator "
j C .
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra
FROM: Finance Committee
Costa_
r
County
�.�I.
DATE: February 23, 1993
SUBJECT: BUCHANAN FIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS
SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1 . ACCEPT REPORT on the feasibility of a Redevelopment Project
Area comprised of Buchanan Field; and CONCUR with conclusion
that a Redevelopment Project Area comprised solely of Buchanan
Field is not feasible at this time.
2 . Request the Redevelopment Director to examine other areas
adjacent to Buchanan Field for a possible new redevelopment
project area, which does not include the Pacheco Community.
BACKGROUND:
On December 22, 1992 the Redevelopment Agency Board of Supervisors
terminated the Redevelopment Plan adoption process as it relates to
the Pacheco Community. The Board requested a report from the
Redevelopment Director on the feasibility of a Redevelopment
Project Area comprised of Buchanan Field only, and referred the
item to the Internal Operations and Finance Committees for review.
The Finance Committee discussed this report on February 8, 1993 and
determined that staff should consider alternative redevelopment
areas which include Buchanan Field and adjacent land, other than
the Pacheco Community.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
� v
SIGNATURE(S): Gayle Bishop Tom Powers
'ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED � RECOMMENDED OTHER
i
i
I
� I
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS \
1 HEREBY'CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT'C.OPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON HT E.MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: Redevelopment Directo
ATTESTED
County Adminis tra r PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
County Counse "��
GMEDA SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY DEPUTYp
M382 ( 8) �`
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1 .0.-1 ,•��� Contra
FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Costa
County
v��•V� �b
DATE: February 8, 1993 ieu
s'q' dr
SUBJECT: REPORT ON FEASIBILITY OF A REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA CONSTITUTING
ONLY BUCHANAN FIELD AIRPORT
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1 . Concur with the previous staff conclusion that a Redevelopment
Project Area comprised solely of Buchanan Field is not
feasible at this time.
2 . Remove this item as a referral to the Internal Operations
Committee.
BACKGROUND:
On January 26, 1993 the Board of Supervisors referred to the
Internal Operations Committee and Finance Committee the issue of
whether a Redevelopment Project Area comprised solely of Buchanan
Field is feasible at this time.
On February 8, 1993 our Committee met . with Jim Kennedy, Deputy
Redevelopment Director, and reviewed the attached report. It is
clear to our Committee that as long as the Redevelopment Agency
cannot capture the additional revenue from the PACE and Sportland
stores it is not financially feasible to consider a Redevelopment
Project Area which includes only the Buchanan Field Airport
property.
We are, therefore, recommending that the Board of Supervisors
concur with the staff position recommended to the Board previously.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _Y_—YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COM TE
APPROVE O#1 R
SIGNATURE(S): r SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK JEF F
ACTION OF BOARD ON February 23, 1993 1 p VED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED`ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS SOON. HE DATE SHOWN.
County Admin' rator ATTESTED
Contact: PHIL BATCHELOR.CLERK F THE BOARD OF
cc: Community velopment Director
Jim�Kendy, Deputy Redevelopment DlrectOrSUPERVISORS AND COUNTY AD ISTRATOR
Pubrks Director
Ma. ager of Airports
Sony Enea, Senior Deputy County Administrator DEPUTY
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
DATE: February 4, 1993
TO: Internal Operations Committee
Supervisor Sunne Wright McPeak
Supervisor Jeff Smith
Finance Committee
Supervisor Tom Powers
Supervi or le Bishop
FROM: Jim Kenn
Deputy Dire t - Redevelopment
. SUBJECT: k u anan Field Redevelopment Project Area
1. Basis for January 26, 1993 Recommendation
The basis for the staff recommendation of January 26, 1993 (Attachment A) was due to
two interrelated elements - the Redevelopment Plan Adoption scheduling/process, and
resultant financial feasibility. The Redevelopment Plan Adoption process has a "critical
path" schedule and sequence that can no longer be accomplished in the current fiscal
year. That results in the process having to be restarted in FY 93-94 with a new base
year Assessed Value that includes Parcel A (PACE, Sportland). Therefore, the property
tax increment from Parcel A would not accrue to the Redevelopment Agency.
The estimate of maximum tax increment for a Buchanan Field only Redevelopment
Project is shown on Attachment B. The purchasing power of the gross tax increment
revenue stream is $1.7 million. This value is likely to be lower because of fiscal
agreements, housing set-asides, and administrative costs. An example, with relatively
conservative assumptions, is provided as Table 1. The comparison of the purchasing
power to the contributions of the County and County-controlled agencies is quite close
(Purchasing Power = $742,381; County contributed revenue = $562,700). The proper
policy question to ask is whether the County wouldn't be better off financing the capital
project(s) directly, rather than indirectly via redevelopment (which costs money to
implement, which costs to administer, and which diverts away from capital projects).
TABLE 1
ESTIMATE OF BUCHANAN FIELD REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENTS
(Net Present Value)
Gross Tax Increments $1,712,417
Minus
208 Housing Set-Aside (1) $342,483
Fiscal Agreement Pass-Thru's
Fire District (2) $251,554
Mosquito Abatement (3) $2,312
East Bay Regional Parks (4) $20,292
Supt of Schools (5) $9,076
Mt Diablo Unified Schools (6) $223,778
Sub-Total $507,012
Administration (7) $120,541
Net Tax Increment for Capital Projects $742,381
Footnotes
(1) Mandated by State Law
(2) Board Policy of 1008 pass-thru
(3) 508 pass-thru
(4) 308 pass-thru
(5) 508 pass-thru
(6) 408 pass-thru
(7) 108 of net available tax increment
Internal Operations Committee
Finance Committee
Page 2
II. Costs of Redevelopment Plan Adoption Prior to Abandonment
Attachment C provides the actual costs incurred prior to abandonment. The Agency's
consultants had substantially completed an administrative draft of the EIR, and an
administrative draft of the Preliminary Report prior to abandonment. Both were
necessary prior to initiation of subsequent steps, i.e., community consultation and fiscal
review.
III. Asset Protection
Buchanan Field is an asset that the Board of Supervisors has consistently maintained
should be under the jurisdiction of the County. A Buchanan Field only Redevelopment
Project provides no additional protection because it is in the sphere of influence of one
city. Further, Buchanan Field and the boundaries of the Redevelopment Area are
uninhabited. The County as owner of the property, and majority owner of properties
subject to annexation, should be able to control its own destiny as to whether and on
what terms annexation occurs.
cc: CAO
County Counsel
Director, GMEDA
Director of Community Development
Public Works Director
Airport Manager
File H 1.1(c)
l jk/jb/bfredpa.mem
�.�.
TO: REDHVELOPMENT AGENCY :�� / antranTrG('�,�SIG_
FROM: Phil Batchelor W
Executive Director COurt/
DATE: January 26, 1993
SUBJECT: Buchanan Field Redevelopment Project Feasibility Analysis
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) & BACIGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDA'TTIONS
ACCEPT REPORT on the feasibility of a Redevelopment Project Area
comprised of Buchanan Field; and CONCUR with conclusion that a
Redevelopment Project Area comprised solely of Buchanan Field is not
feasible at this time.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
See attached report.
CONTINUED ON ATTACffi ENT: YES SIGNATURE:
_RECOMMENDATION OF EBECUT1'7E DIRECTOR RECOM12NDATION OF AGZNCX CD*.QiITT=.
APPROVE OTHER ( /
I
SIGNATURE(S)
ACTION OF AGZNCY ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF COMMISSIONERS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ASSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THB
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ES OF THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact: Jim Kennedy
646-4076 ATTESTED
orig: Redevelopment Agency PHIL BATCHE7+09,
County Administrator AGENCY SECRETARY
County Counsel
G"44EDA
Community Development BY , DEPII
Public Warks
Airport Manager
via Redevelopment
- Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council
- Goldfarb & Lipman
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
DATE: January 26, 1993
TO: Redevelopment Agency
FROM: Jim K y
Deputy Dire r-Redevelopment
SUBJECT: / Bu nan Field Redevelopment Project Area
On December 22, 1992 the Redevelopment Agency Board of Supervisors terminated
the Redevelopment Plan adoption process as it relates to the Pacheco community.
The Agency/Board requested a report on the feasibility of a Redevelopment Project
Area comprised of Buchanan Field only (map attached).
1. CONCLUSION
Two factors were evaluated with respect to this feasibility analysis:
1 . Plan adoption schedule;
2. Financial viability/Asset Protection.
The report concludes that the formation of a Redevelopment Project Area comprised
of Buchanan Field only would not generate sufficient tax increment to be financially
viable. In large measure this occurs because the adoption of a Redevelopment Plan
for Buchanan Field would require utilization of the 1993-94 Equalized Tax Rolls,
therefore, tax increment from Parcel A (PACE) would not accrue to the Agency.
II. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Two interacting factors must be evaluated to determine the feasibility of a
Redevelopment Project comprised of Buchanan Field alone - Plan adoption schedule
and financial viability.
A. Plan Adoption Schedule
The Redevelopment Plan adoption process takes approximately 12 months from
initiation to adoption. Initiation of the Redevelopment Plan adoption process
begins with the release of the Equalized Tax Roll in August of each year. The
A A
P 3 -? Y
TO: Redevelopment Agency -2- January 26, 1993
RE: Buchanan Field Redevelopment
Project Area
Redevelopment Plan must be adopted prior to release of the subsequent year's
Equalized Tax Roll. The procedural steps required for a Buchanan Field
Redevelopment Plan adoption cannot now be completed prior to the County
releasing its 1993-94 Equalized Tax Roil. Therefore, the Redevelopment Plan
adoption process would have to be restarted in August, 1993.
The 1993-94 Equalized Tax Roil will include the improvement values on Parcel
A at Buchanan Field (PACE, Sportsmart). Since the 1993-94 Ta_x Rolls will be
--the base year, the Redevelopment Agency will accrue no property tax
increments from Parcel A. Tax increment potential would be limited to Parcel
B on the west side of the Airport.
B. Financial Viability/Asset Protection
Parcel B permits up to 180,000 square feet of private commercial development.
Depending on the development type, the value of those improvements could
range from approximately $10-15 million (development values of $55-85/foot).
Tax Increment resulting from such development would range from $115,000-
170,000/year. This annual income stream would likely be reduced by Fiscal
Agreement pass-thru's to other taxing entities, and by administrative costs.
Conservatively, 30% of the gross tax increment could be lost to other taxing
entities, decreasing the annual revenue stream to a range of $80,000-120,000.
A viable Redevelopment Program would not be supportable with such revenues.
Furthermore, the Redevelopment Plan adoption expenses would still be an
estimated $150,000.
Buchanan Field is an asset that the Board of Supervisors has consistently
maintained should be under the jurisdiction of the County. Buchanan Field and
the boundaries of the Redevelopment Area are an uninhabited area. The
County as owner of the property, and majority owner of property subject to a
change in political jurisdiction, should be able to control its own destiny as to
whether a change in political jurisdiction is appropriate.
JK.Ih
va7/buchfiel.mem
FIGURE I-2
AIRPORT LOCATION MAP N
BUCHANAN FIELD AIRPORT ———— AIRPORT ?ROPEATY
BOUNDARY
CONCORD, CA
SCALE
• a 1.oao•
SOURCE: McC:INTOCK. SECXER 3 ASSOCIATES APRIL 1989
` NIN' RPORATED •-'
ata
a �
vFyE ,i
•
souM2.210 f
o fL
R ONIYl�N
CENTRAL l.NIT•/T 1� ' T11�TeN
• oIsTRicr TRa.rLaNr
PLANT �
W �
W y
yy w
Ca � �QN V OqMILLCRlST O•RR
rpt
ILLCRlS
lNT•117
O SCHOOL 420.
YKt•N
anval:NTt11
l L
Nc
�CS c Qge
a
QO O a�
VA o ( c
8 ¢H 1
_ SIE f `f
P
e,
i
1/T.Dl."
1 NION SCHOOL
1
BUCH•N•N Pena
1
PLE ANT
o y. aT
HQ'Q'
VP I` ' j
.411
^' •1 ?y '
W �
r CORD •iia a sNao-
a'
a
••o
ouGLo VALLEY „�. i• rnaLay.
COLLlC!
o.�v. I :J1 i caNrlA
SUN
v«!T s
.pyp,yqq u n m b m �o b b u �o �o .e b �o m u b b �o �e to m u io le b b m u u m to .o u �o m m m m a .•.
w - .i N N « « ti .w w « r ti « ~ - n N « ~ ~ w � ~ ~ w N N N N � N •
N M w « N ~ , M « N , « « N w N , N « M M N N w w N M ~ M » �
m M N n N N
o- M N on n N 0 o N N n n n N N N n N n m m
o ^ « r o « N N r o
r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r v N
IOJ M M N N M N N M N M N N N w
N
N
n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n n b b
' N N ry = = n N n � � N • • • n n V = n n
S. n � n n n n M w M n •
N M M « M N N w N M N N N M M N M �► N M « N N N
pyy mm . M
p N N .Vi .Vi w wVi wVi .Vr ti w w•i • .•i .•i A .•i w • w H w .rn .•.� .Vn • .Vi N • w .••1 w n w .Vi w w .Va w w w N N
g. `Q� IY M IV CI N N N M1 N M1 N M1 N N N N M1 N N N M1 N N N N N N N ry ry N N N N N N N N N nN.
m m i► w i► w w N w w w w N « w w w N - « w w - N « N N w w w w w w N N w N «
N M N N N N n N N N N N N N n N N N N N N N N N N n n N N n M N n N n N N • O
OGf N N M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N • m
m w « • N « M V w N w « « • • Z •M •« M . • N M«N N w • N • • w N • « N • b
m N M M M N N N N N
• M r I
• m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m N N V
• O O O O O O O O O D O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 h
• F m b �O b b m m b b b m m �O �p 10 m �p m m 10 m m m b m b m 10 b b b b b b b b �O m m r m
• RL n n n n n n M M n n « � N « N n n � w n n • « N n « N « « N n `
M ,
N
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n N
01 m m P m OI m m m P m 01 01 P m P m A m P P P N OI pl P P P m P m P P P P P P P OI .r n
• p m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m r h
• S ./ '1 r� w w .� , , .� .y .r .r A .y ` w .y .y .a .� .r .y .y w ' .w .� .+ .a « w .r w w n m
fUJ M M M « M M M M M w M M w N N M M M M N M M M w N M N M w M N « M M w N N M r N
N M
Z N N N N N N N N N N N N M1 N N N M1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N n
i m m m m m m m m m q m m O� P m m m m m m m m m m m m m al p m m m m m m m m m m r m
m n r r r r r r r n r r r r r r r r r r r n r r r r r r r r r n r n m m
ri ri �w n n n n ri ri n ri ri ri n wi n n Iw n ri ai n n ri ri wi ri ri ri ri ri ri r e
w w w w « « N N w w N N w
M
N
p m m m m m m m m m m m m OI g m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m M1 •
$ [� IO.I Iel IO.I n n n rO.l n n n n rO.l n n wOl n w01 10.1 101 101 n n n n rel n x.01 n O n n n n n n O O n n b N
M N w N M « « « w N N
N w
0
m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m o m m m m m m m m m m m m m o N o
M
w
M M « M M N M « N N N « « N
O O O o O e O O o o O O O O o O O O O O O O 0 O e O O O O O O O o O O O O N r
OC m m m m b ry b ry b m b b ry n m m m m m b b m b 9 b m m m b m
N N b b 10 ry b m m n • n
Y a N N N N M1 h N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N M1 N N N M1 N
W $ N M N w N M w M M w N M M M M N M M M « M M M w N M N w N « N N N N M w N N M • N ../
N .t .. .r .� .� .� .. w w 1•>
8 a r r r r n r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r n r r r r r r m N
8 n n N N N N N N M1 n N n m n
p0 m m m m m m m m O m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m m N N
po G wmi .mr w .bi mi w .bi r w w w ami wmi .mi N .mi mi .mi w .bi r .mi .bi .mi w .mi .mi rmi .b+ .mi w w .mi .bi ti w N n \
P ,rj m m m M m m m m m m m m m m M m M m m m »
W
O O 0 0 o O O O O O ^ O O O n 0 n O ^ 0 O ^ n O O ^ O O O O 0 O 0 n 0 0 0 0 n n N
« N N N « w « N w N w « w n n n n n n n n n w n N M A
m m
w M M �► N la• M A M M N N N N w N « M M M « n
Z N •
O . M
N
a w
w w n 0 N n „ aei „ fO1 n n n aei N N n aef n n n n n i0e1 � n aei n n •Ot N n N n N n N o N aei n n ^,1
n N n N n N N N N N n n N N N N N N N NN N N n N M n N N N • •
z w i w w w i .•i .•. .•n w w w , w w .•i , w .•i .•. w .•i .•+ , ,
.•. • .•a w .•. •. •i •. .•.. • r
w w N N w w « N « w w « N w w w w w w w w w w w w w
M M
F
0 0 0 o e o 0 0 0 o e o e o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e o 0
00 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a 0
4a0 > a a a O a a a a a a 0 O a a a a O O O a a 0 a a 0 O a O O O O a 0 O O O a a
K o 0 0 0 0 o e o 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o e o 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 e o 0 0 0 0 0 0
. . . .» » » » a a » » » » »
w w w « M N « « « « N M M M M N N N « « M « « M M M M « M M M N M M N M N M w
• N m m P
en M H ON O IeV n n N ryO n e e n n n fel lOv O Ho IOV
ry O
nP w N O H 0. 1.
0 0 0
N N N N ry ry N N h .i myt
AYe.e-
Supplement to Item 1.64
1/26/93 Agenda
0
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
DATE: January 26, 1993
TO: Redevelopment Agency'
FROM: Jim Kennedy
Deputy.Director-Redevelopment
SUBJECT: Pacheco/Buchanan Field Redevelopment Plan Adoption Expenses
i
In its December 15, 1992 action terminating the Redevelopment Plan Adoption
process as it relates to the Pacheco area, the Agency requested a report on costs
incurred prior to the abandonment of proceedings. Please be advised that the total
cost to abandonment were as follows:
Redevelopment Plan consultants: $ 30,260.95
EIR consultant: 36.078.92
TOTAL: $ 66,339.87
JK:)h
cc: Fla H3.1(a)
sra7/costs.mam
RECEIVE®
February 21 , 1993
Internal operations Committee FEB 2 2 1993
Members of the Board of Supervisors j
jl ►� _
Dear Members o f the Board: ERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA CO.
On Wednesday February 17 , 1993 at 7 p.m . PMAC had its first off-
icial meeting since October 14, 1992 . After that date PMAC meet-
ings were consumed by Redevelopment spec-,hes . The first year term,.
of four members ended November 30 , 1992 , and the new members were
not selected until February 1993 .
The three original PMAC members met with the four newly selected
members at the airport conference room. After we became acquainted,
We elected our officials , and then we discussed at lengh the
PMAC ' a position regarding training helicopter flights.
We decided unanimously to terminate the search for any alternate
training site , do what we can to modify training flight patterns
and wait until all or some of the training flights can be directed
to the Byron airport .
IN ANSWER TO YOUR LETTER DATED 10-28-92
My letter was given to the Board Clerk 10-16-92. I don ' t know
why you did not receive it until 10-27-92 . On that date each
Supervisor was not only provided with my letter , but was also
provided with a map indicating where I believed the copters should
fly . A copy of that map: is included with this letter .
When PMAC voted for a moratorium , we requested that the training
helicopters be moved to a SAFER LOCATION such as the route
indicated on the map near Acme Dump .
Byron had not even been seledted as a site , so there was no reason
for PMAC to visit the Byron Airport and to discuss the issue
with the Byron Municipal Advisory Council .
D '
I .
-2-
I had hoped the training copters would be relocated to the pos-
ition,;shown on the map near the Acme Dump . However , before I was
able to speak to the Board , I conversed with Dorothy Sakazaki .
She convinced me that such a location was a great hazard to all
people concerned.
When I was speaking to the Board , you asked me where I would I
prefer to relocate the copters . I told you my original choice
was Martinez , but since it was such a hazardous location , I felt
the training coptets should remain near Pacheco until they could
be moved to Byron .
PMAC did not make any recommendation.-- regarding fixed wing air-
craft because I stated in my letter , "This letter refers speci-
fically to the Robinson 22 helicopter .
When PMAC recommended the moritorium they were not aware that the
county could not make a distiction between helicopters and other
aircraft . This fact was not mentioned in the chambers when Super-
visor Faden requested a moritorium at an earlier date .
Although the copter crash in late September WAS NOT a training
flight , the R22 which crashed belonged to HAI . According to
Scott Erickson , an investigator with the National Transportation
Safety Board , "There is a feeling this was an introductory type
of flight . " He added , "Authorities believe Lacy was giving Pol
a 30-minute trip to see if he liked copters and that the pair had
just left the airport after being cleared for a takeoff. "
According to the latest information , Helicopters Adventure Inc .
is not a Fixed Base Operator so perhaps the county would not
be exposed to legal financial damages if it tried to relocate HAI?
After all of the negative publicity regarding training helicopters ,
if there is another crash , the county will certainly be exposed
to great financial damages .
>� 2
Sincerely , t�G
Wally Wiggs , President , PMAC
RECE' `ED
i OUCT 1 g 1992
October 16, 1992 CLE RK60.:;RDOFSUPERVISORS
CONT �ce_).q-,A,Co.
Sunne McPeak, Chair of the Board
Members of the Board of Supervisors
651 Pine Street
Martinez , CA 94553
Dear Members of the Board:
At the October 14 , 1992 Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council Meet-
ing the subject of supporting a moratorium on helicopter training
flights from Buchanan Airport Field was discussed . This letter
refers specifically to the Robinson R22 helicopter .
Following the discussion , a vote was taken and a motion was made
and unanimously approved that PMAC supports a moratorium on all
training flights from November 3, 1992 until they can be moved to
a safer location .
Copies of this letter will be sent to the Public Works Director
and Airport Manager .
Sincerely,
Wally Wiggs, President , PMAC .
CC: Mike Walford , Director
Hal Wight , Airport Manage .
cc: Pub it,
• ROUTE TO OFF AIRPORT SITE
. % :1 : .•• :�.r'� I � I Nab t ir1 q_
ORIGINAL PATTERN I I
_• PATTERN #2 —+ Dl1�TRA
+ COSTA 3150 ( ��
315 0 1 '
sr -- •-- -- ——— .i
cV01117
I �DVOL
�--�
1 I
. 32 Qf1.U
kLicop A V 0 N]
SHOULD_F -
4'c,Y ,tu
;`
+
3200.01 I •<< .w�, of sf ,
1
J -------------
----------
---.---. - I o v+' cNrwr�ro
3 I 200.0 J%, '"° 1 20Q.01 I
• aN CT
'y 1
f , I Cp•r J.
• t 1
.r!'� fir' • � y0'
+itflcso,•;=tKrrrt t f' ' u� 3200• 2
�� I•••01 ` � r I•I.•-•11•n
��I y.) 1 rra,P•••G n ♦ � � � 1 I Z
1 --.a i / �� , � arllyp , •t i�ei•ti�c` ..I .� •.ec r•sr . \=
p � 1.� t. � •� qb
e j `.:Itti�ir"'�eo9��-- • �� \N cyµ � _J___ '�'� i
— = ` ! 4 k \'•'u��'i� t ,.rcb1—
i l t r'•• r4 �I Y!�[I.f. 7.Ct rtrilNp �i
v 1" i )• 0f . 1 A ..vu tr•trNM llr•
._ C"T•• , .r,. , YI Y a• tet` , ,9/�1•. - •�, � .lft, ..V17 IUC o
[>- Q • E .N41 �✓i t ► �•1
`t``f 'S'r.iA70rr 11 •••rrr•ararr
� n : 2��•1 t�r Fit e�T •� wr•wr•rw NA �r
AiAl
r\ �
1 ice.-r-tre a .irr~ ••r, r• 1 —' • 1 Riot .115,E t-'A r\
cr
.% � 44•:1' g,: ,r• 1 i A.•A � �d•i�.Ye'�uur. \�-
� ' ., fCT
.rlrt
:� r ••rt f [ tr :• 4 e•n el. • .co•P
so O r,e•at O o
11 Ile
-�' a.. �` ,yi1 t.��i r':. •t r. :a� O- w .v ,'1. NA 4w v.•,• 3 I 1 i
EXHIBIT "A7i
_Er-1 Tr`nPTFRc, 15 FLY—HERE r"'' 4 r'
Friday, October 2, 1992 Contra Costa Times--3A
Judge weighs use of DNA evidence
In a case that may have a wide-ranging impaction criminal court cases, a
Contra Costa Superior Court judge is considering whether to allow DNA
evidence in the upcoming sexual assault trial of a Martinez man. —7A
1*ctions after c
"If that helicopter had crashed on the County air traffic is valuable training.
Juvenile Hall facility, the county would "To make it easier for their economic
have been wiped out financially ... or if it viability, we're the ones who suffer," Fah-
had hit the elementary school or gone into den said.
a home." Since opening five years ago, the heli-
It was still unclear Thursday who exact- copter flight school's fleet has grown from
ly sponsored the fatal flight. The victims one helicopter to 20 and draws students
were flying in a Robinson R22 helicopter from around the world for its six-month
belonging to P.J. MacLellan Ltd. and shar- training program.
ing hangar space at Buchanan Field with Some helicopter training already occurs
Helicopter Adventures Inc., according to a at Byron, where two to three copters prac-
news release from Helicopter Adventures. Lice every weekday. .
The statement said Helicopter Adven- Scott Erickson, an investigator with the
tures believed the aircraft was on a short National Transportation Safety Board,said
sightseeing trip. They declined any further details of Wednesday's ill-fated flight still
comment Wednesday and Thursday. were unknown.
But on Thursday, Buchanan Field's Wil- "There is a feeling that this was an in-
liams said the craft had been operated by troductory type of flight," he said, adding
Helicopter Adventures. _ that authorities believed Lacy was giving
"It is leased back to Helicopter Adven- Pol a 30-minute trip to see if he liked heli-
tures. ... that's where it was operating out copters and that the pair had just left the
of," Williams said. airport after being cleared for takeoff.
Helicopter school owners have resisted It could be six months before cause of
efforts to move to Byron, contending there the crash is officially determined, Erickson
is inadequate housing and restaurants for said. Witnesses said the craft's rotor
students,and that flying in heavier Central seemed to malfunction.
-_ SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK Contra Board of Supervisors
Supervisor, District Four
2301 Stanwell Drive Costa
Concord, California 94520 County
(510)646-5763
(510)646-5767 (FAX)
October 28, 1992
Mr. Wally Wiggs
187 Freda Drive
Pacheco, CA 94,5,5!3 Q D
Dear Mr. iggs:Wia�
We received the enclosed letter on October 27, 1992, and will
consider it in conjunction with a report from the Aviation
Advisory Committee on November 3.
When President Wiggs appeared before the Board of Supervisors on
October 27, we asked him three questions which we would like to
pass on to the full Pacheco Municipal Advisory Council (PMAC) .
Those questions are:
1. Did PMAC make any recommendations regarding fixed-wing
aircraft training flights?
2. When the PMAC made the recommendation contained in your
letter, were the members aware that FAA restrictions
prohibit the county from making a distinction between
helicopters and other types of aircraft?
3 . Has PMAC visited Byron Airport or met with the Byron
Municipal Advisory Committee to discuss the feasibility of
moving some or all of the training flights from Buchanan
Field to Byron Airport?
The Board of Supervisors respectfully requests the PMAC to
address these questions and advise us on what course of action
you recommend since (a) we cannot legally treat helicopters
differently from other aircraft; and (b) the helicopter crash in
late September was not a training flight so we need to deal with
helicopter safety issues apart from problems associated with
training flights. Further, County Counsel has warned the Board
of Supervisors that declaring a moratorium on all training
flights from Buchanan Field (we would have to halt all training
flights, not just helicopters, in order to not violate FAA
regulations) is likely to be in conflict with the fixed-based
operators ' (FBO' s) leases and agreements and expose the county to
legal financial damages. Although I voted against granting an
FBO lease to Helicopter Adventures and argued that it was
irresponsible to enter into an FBO lease with the helicopter
Mr. Wally Wiggs
October 28, 1992
Page Two
training lease until we had worked out restrictions on noise and
identified an alternative site for training, the Board voted 4-1
to enter into the agreement. Therefore, the county has a real
dilemma as to how to best act to relieve the impacts on Pacheco
from helicopter training flights and to ensure maximum safety
from all helicopter operations, while at the same time not
violating the FAA rules and incurring lawsuits. That is why I
have actively tried to locate an interim training site off
Buchanan Field. The Board of Supervisors would greatly
appreciate hearing your views on this matter and would entertain
any alternative site proposals you may have.
Thank you for your assistance and attention to this important
matter.
Sincerely,
Sunne Wright McPeak
SWM:vlb
Enclosure
2-7 y
�' O /
�• �� p rn
I �
James J . High RECEIV
3682 Hillsborough Drive _
Concord , CA. 99520 OR2
(915) 676-2066 f s
Q-ERK BOARD OF 8iJPERVISOR.�
C0,11MA COSTA CO.
March 1 , 1993
Honorable Sunne McPeak , Chair
and Members of the Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa County
651 Pine Street-Room 106
Martinez , Ca . 99553-0095
Re: Helicopters- IOC Meeting
At the IOC meeting I was very upset that Patrick Corr stated
that his company made unorganized touch and goes at the
wetlands for two years . I would like to know why the F. A.A.
in the control tower condoned this unorganized touch and
goes . I all so found out that Helicopter Adventures all so
makes unorganized touch and goes at Black Diamond Mines , Mt .
Dilabo, Clayton Valley Hills and the Acme Fill . Helicopter
Adventures should acquire permission to use parks and
private property to make touch and goes .
I still have not heard why that helicopter was over the
Hidden Vally Elem. School Sept . 30, 1992 when it crash, was
it in a unorganized flight path? If he was in the future
what can be done to prevent this from happen again.
H.A. I . does not have a FBO contract with the Airport so what
control do you have over them? You said that you have no
control over them when they are in the air, the FAA has the
control . If the Airport had a FOB contract they could have
control on the helicopters on land and air. They could p;:t
in the contract what they can do and not do and where they
can go and not go. If they did not abide by the contract you
could cancel it .
Sunne McPeak also mention the noise monitoring system. I do
not feel it will do any thing for the helicopter noise.
Sunne hit the nail on the head when she said that the
helicopter noise hangs in the air for a long time, where as
a fix wing comes and goes in a very short time. Studies have
March 1 , 1993
Page 2
shown that noise and vibrations associated with helicopters
are more annoying to . residents then noise from fixed ging
aircraft.
If you had a mosquito or a fly in your bedroom you could
fall a sleep with the fly but not the mosquito. You know how
irritating a mosquito is , to some people the helicopters are
just as irritating.
Thank you for your consideration regarding this matter.
Very truly yours ,
Hame . High
- ` -6) Hrn
James J . High
3682 Hillsborough Drive �—�_ �
Concord , CA. 99520 OR 2 1992 i
(915) 676-2066
CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
CONMA COSTA CO,
March 1 , 1993
Honorable Sunne McPeak, Chair
and Members of the Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa County
651 Pine Street-Room 106
Martinez , Ca . 99553-0095
Re : Helicopters- IOC Meeting
At the IOC meeting I was very upset that Patrick Corr stated
that his company made unorganized touch and goes at the
wetlands for two years . I would like to know why the F. A. A.
in the control tower condoned this unorganized touch and
goes . I all so found out that Helicopter Adventures all so
makes unorganized touch and goes at Black Diamond Mines , Mt .
Dilabo, Clayton Valley Hills and the Acme Fill . Helicopter
Adventures should acquire permission to use parks and
private property to make touch and goes .
I still have not heard why that helicopter was over the
Hidden Vally Elem. School Sept . 30, 1992 when it crash, was
it in a unorganized flight path? If he was in the future
what can be done to prevent this from happen again.
H.A. I . does not have a FBO contract with the Airport so what
control do you have over them? You said that you have no
control over them when they are in the air, the FAA has the
control . If the Airport had a FOB contract they could have
control on the helicopters on land and air. They could put
in the contract what they can do and not do and where they
can go and not go. If they did not abide by the contract you
could cancel it .
Sunne McPeak also mention the noise monitoring system. I do
not feel it will do any thing for the helicopter noise.
Sunne hit the nail on the head when she said that the
helicopter noise hangs in the air for a long time, where as
a fix wing comes and goes in a very short time. Studies have
March 1 , 1993
Page 2
shown that noise and vibrations associated with helicopters
are more annoying to residents then noise from fixed wing
aircraft .
If you had a mosquito or a fly in your bedroom you could
fall a sleep with the fly but not the mosquito. You know how
irritating a mosquito is , to some people the helicopters are
just as irritating .
Thank you for your consideration regarding this matter.
Very truly yours ,
ames J . High
- 4-o Am
LtiVE J .
James J . High
3682 Hillsborough Drive _
Concord , CA. 94520 OR
(415 ) 676-2066 t
CLERK BOARD OF&U,PE F
CC"SERA COSTA.CO. i
March 1 , 1993
Honorable Sunne McPeak, Chair
and Members of the Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa County
651 Pine Street-Room 106
Martinez , Ca . 94553-0095
Re: Helicopters- IOC Meeting
At the IOC meeting I was very upset that Patrick Corr stated
that his company made unorganized touch and goes at the
wetlands for two years . I would like to know why the F.A.A.
in the control tower condoned this unorganized touch and
goes . I all so found out that Helicopter Adventures all so
makes unorganized touch and goes at Black Diamond Mines , Mt .
Dilabo, Clayton Valley Hills and the Acme Fill . Helicopter
Adventures should acquire permission to use parks and
private property to make touch and goes.
I still have not heard why that helicopter was over the
Hidden Vally Elem. School Sept . 30, 1992 when it crash, was
it in a unorganized flight path? If he was in the future
what can be done to prevent this from happen again.
H.A. I . does not have a FBO contract with the Airport so what
control do you have over them? You said that you have no
control over them when they are in the air , the FAA has the
control . If the Airport had a FOB contract they could have
control on the helicopters on land and air . They could p;:t
in the contract what they can do and not do and where they
can go and not go. If they did not abide by the contract you
could cancel it .
Sunne McPeak also mention the noise monitoring system. I do
not feel it will do any thing for the helicopter noise.
Sunne hit the nail on the head when she said that the
helicopter noise hangs in the air for a long time, where as
a fix wing comes and goes in a very short time. Studies have
March 1 , 1993
Page 2
shown that noise and vibrations associated with helicopters
are more annoying to residents then noise from fixed wing
aircraft .
If you had a mosquito or a fly in your bedroom you could
fall a sleep with the fly but not the mosquito. You know how
irritating a mosquito is , to some people the helicopters are
just as irritating .
Thank you for your consideration regarding this matter.
Very truly yours ,
aures J. High