Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin 07-27-091. ROLL CALL The Ukiah City Council and Ukiah Redevelopment Agency met at a Special Joint Meeting on July 27, 2009, the notice for which being legally noticed on July 22, 2009. Mayor Baldwin called the meeting to order at 5:03:20 PM. Roll was taken with the following Councilmembers present: Landis, Thomas, Crane, Rodin, and Mayor Baldwin, which also serve as Commissioners for the Ukiah Redevelopment Agency. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager Chambers, Assistant City Manager Sangiacomo, City Attorney Rapport, Director of Planning and Community Development Stump, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Eriksen, and Acting City Clerk Brown. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. RIGHT TO APPEAL DECISION 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS 5. PUBLIC HEARING a. Adoption of Resolution Approving a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the City of Ukiah and City of Ukiah Redevelopment Agency Agreements to Purchase and Sell Real Property - Airport Industrial Park 5:05:02 PM. Planning & Community Development Director Stump presented-the item. The proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration includes the following findings: Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Environmental Study, the project, as mitigated, does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the local or regional environment; 2. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Environmental Study, the project, as mitigated, will not result in short-term impacts that will create a disadvantage to long-term environmental goals; 3. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Environmental Study, the project, as mitigated, will not result in impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable; and 4. Based upon the analysis, findings and conclusions contained in the Initial Environmental Study, the project, as mitigated, will not result in environmental impacts that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either direbtly or indirectly. 5. The Initial Environmental Study examined areas of potential impacts and evaluated them in light of the 1995 Program EIR to determine if the project would result in new or increased impacts. Based on the conclusions reached in the Initial Environmental Study, it has been determined that the proposed Agreement to purchase and sell land in and of itself would not have significant adverse impacts on the environment because the zoning and development opportunities would not change as a result of the project. However, future development projects would be subject to CEQA evaluation, and determinations made as to whether or not those projects would be consistent with the assumptions and scope of the 1995 certified Program EIR and subsequent Traffic studies. The 1995 Mitigation Program would be applied to those projects as it has been for all development projects proposed and approved since that time. a. The conclusion that the proposed Agreement to Purchase Land would not in and of itself have significant adverse impacts on the environment is based on the following: b. The Airport Industrial Park has built out less intensively than assumed in the 1995 Program EIR, as evidenced in the analysis contained in this Initial Environmental Study c. The development potential for the properties involved in the Agreement to Purchase Land would not change from what is currently possible because the project would not change the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development Ordinance which contains the allowed and permitted land uses and the required development standards. Moreover, while the Agency will acquire title to the 18 Acres and an option to purchase the 14.75 Acres, no more information is available now about the specific projects that will be constructed on this property than was known when the Program EIR and the 2004 and 2007 Mitigated Negative Declarations were adopted by the City. d. The 2004 and 2007 Mitigated Negative Declarations approved for the rezonings of the subject properties found no additional new environmental impacts resulting from those actions except for traffic. e. The 2004 and 2007 Traffic Studies prepared for the rezonings found that the proposed re-designation of the subject properties to a classification that would potentially allow full retail commercial development would require a new traffic signal at the intersection of Commerce Drive and Airport Park Boulevard to maintain the required Level of Service "D" at impacted intersections. f. The 2004 and 2007 Mitigated Negative Declarations included a mitigation measure requiring the traffic signal when commercial development is approved on the subject properties. g. The hydrology, geology and soils on the site have not changed and the mitigation measures contained in the 1995 Program EIR are still appropriate, reasonable and feasible. h. The biological setting of the site has not changed and the mitigation measures contained in the 1995 Program EIR are still appropriate, reasonable and feasible. i. The historic and cultural resource setting has not changed and the mitigation measures contained in the 1995 Program EIR are still appropriate, reasonable and feasible. j. The existing Light Manufacturing/Mixed-Use designation on the parcels affected by the proposed Agreement to Purchase Land would not change and it contains architectural and landscaping standards intended to produce attractive well designed developments consistent with the requirements of the 1995 Program EIR. 2 k. The landscaping standards contained in the Light Manufacturing/Mixed-Use designation are intended, in part, to result in energy conservation consistent with the requirements of the 1995 Program EIR. 1. The noise setting of the site is consistent with what was assumed in 1995 and the mitigation measures contained in the 1995 Program EIR are still appropriate, reasonable and feasible. Director Stump reported that no written comments were received, but the Council may receive verbal comment tonight. Recommended Actions): 1) Conduct a public hearing; 2) Consider adopting the Resolution approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the City of Ukiah and City of Ukiah Redevelopment Agency Agreements to Purchase and Sell Real Property - Airport Industrial Park and to waive the CEQA contingencies in the agreements. Public Comment Opened: Public Speaking in Opposition 5:09:27 PM Jim Mulherin, stated the Council may be misguided in spending taxpayers' money for this project and thinks there would be potential negative environmental impacts, if it were built out, i.e. a traffic light will not cure traffic if a Costco goes in., 5:13:48 PM Jack Cox, Ukiah, has problems with this being a redevelopment project which he stated is supposed to be about blight and issues detrimental to economic growth. Buying bare land is not blight. The City is competing against the private sector. 5:16:57 PM Howard Egan, Ukiah, stated the City has no right to spend redevelopment money in this way. 5:17:36 PM Dave Clark, executive director of Mendocino County Tomorrow, offered their official position: The organization is in support of wise land use and planning and the Council's stand on the need for additional revenues through large-format retail development. The negative declaration, though, does not sufficiently study the negative economic impacts or effects to the City and the RDA, if your speculative real estate venture fails. Speculative development should be left to developers. When asked, he stated DDR is a member of Mendocino County Tomorrow. 5:23:46 PM Robin Collier believes proceeding in this way is bad for business. 5:28:45 PM Marsha Dupre, statedit is time to be fiscally responsible, and development should be private, not public. 5:30:25 PM Steve Dangler, asked about contingencies to back up the purchase. 5:33:17 PM Jack Cox clarified he is not part of any group; he just doesn't think this project is redevelopment, and favors private development. Public Speaking to the Topic 5:10:59 PM Jeff Adams, DDR, 1401 Willow Pass Rd., Concord. DDR is happy to learn from the pending actions tonight that the City agrees with them: ® This Valley needs more large-format retail development and jobs. ® That land originally zoned for industrial can be rezoned for retail/ commercial uses. Millions of dollars are being lost in sales tax revenue to Sonoma County in retail leakage. Investing in retail development in RDA will result in Property tax increment increases that can be used for schools and affordable housing. ® That more large-format retail on the outskirts of downtown will have no negative impacts on downtown but will conversely bring more people to downtown that are going now to Santa Rosa. He stated a wish the Board of Supervisors were more proactively seeking solutions to Ukiah's economic problems through land use Alarming and development, instead of stalling applications, refusing to complete promised land use plans like the UVAP, and fighting those willing to invest tens of millions of dollars in this County; and 3 ® They applaud the City as an elected body in this Valley that wants to do the right thing for the Community. ® It's not DDR's business to take a position on the City's negative declaration. 5:27:03 PM John McCowen, private citizen, stated people have criticized the City for: ® Not being business-friendly, and not willing to take the initiative to assist business development; now the City is in a position of doing that, and is being criticized for it. ® Objecting that the purchase of this land could go forward with the adoption of a negative declaration; yet there is no concern that a huge "speculative project," to use their terms, 3-4 times the size of what is contemplated here, can go forward with no environmental review, no public hearing, no public comment and no conditions that they will be required to abide by--that apparently is okay--but a negative declaration in compliance with the CEQA process is not. Public Comment Closed: 5:34:46 PM Attorney Rapport reminded the City Council that the agenda item concerned the proposed mitigated negative declaration, not whether to approve the agreements. The agreements were approved at prior meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency. The decision to approve the mitigated negative declaration must be based on whether there is substantial evidence in the record before the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency upon which a fair argument could be made that purchasing the land will have significant adverse impacts on the environment. Substantial evidence includes facts and reasonable inferences based on facts, but does not include speculation or conjecture which is not based on facts in the record. Almost all of the testimony by the public addressed the merits of purchasing the land, not environmental impacts from purchasing the land which have not been adequately mitigated. What little testimony addressed environmental impacts was based on speculation or conjecture, not facts in the record. For this reason, the City Attorney did not believe it was necessary or appropriate for him to comment on or respond to that testimony. 5:36:05 PM. MIS Thomas/Landis to adopt the recommended action 5:37:23 PM; Mayor Baldwin spoke to inconsistent complaints of people who generally have encouraged the City to avoid EIR's and do Negative Declarations who are now taking the opposite position on that. And, those who have criticized the Redevelopment Agency in the past for using funds for historic preservation and/or gymnasium development/completion, who argued the money should be used to enhance business development and opportunities, are the ones criticizing the City for doing just that right now. He thinks this is an important, positive move for the City of Ukiah. Councilmember Landis stated we're here about whether or not the sale of this assembled piece of property has impacts significant enough to require further study. Based on studies we have compiled, she thought not, noting this is just a sale of property. She thinks it is good planning, has the potential to create the sequence of tax increment, property taxes, and other things that will allow the City to hold onto services we have, and do the kind of redevelopment work that we want to do in our historic downtown with the Palace Hotel and other things that have high value to our Community. She believes this is the best path to take to get for our Community what we think is important. Councilmember Rodin concurred with Landis, and added that the action regarding the assemblage of parcels doesn't imply agreement with one speaker's points about "more retail" or any of those things. The City's assemblage is meant to catalyze activity in an area already zoned for retail-- qualitatively different from changing the zoning in an area and creating a surplus of land zoned for retail. Secondly, this item is not meant to be a competition with the County. Rodin is fully supportive in continuing to work with the County in tax sharing. This is about good planning, and 4 developing retail in areas that are already zoned for that. Downtown revitalization is a critical, important goal of the Redevelopment Agency-this action isn't meant to substitute for investment in the downtown. Mayor Baldwin announced in advance that the following roll call vote will serve for both the City Council and Redevelopment Agency, as this is a joint meeting. 5:42:48 PM Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Landis, Thomas, Crane, Rodin, and Mayor Baldwin; NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Adjournment of Ukiah Redevelopment Agency portion of the meeting and stay in session as the City Council 5:43:22 PM. Recessed: 5:44:19 PM Reconvened: 5:46:48 PM 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Approval of the Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) by the City Council in Accordance with the Requirements of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Director of Public Works/City Engineer Eriksen presented the item, continued from July 16. Recommended Action(s): Approve the SSMP. M/S Crane/Landis to adopt the recommended action 5:46:59 PM; Public Comment: There was none. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmember Landis, Thomas, Crane, Rodin, and Mayor Baldwin; NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Recessed to Closed Session: 5:54:46 PM 7. CLOSED SESSION - Closed Session may be held at anytime during the meeting a. Public Employee Performance Evaluation (Government Code § 5495) Title: City Manager Reconvened with no reportable action at 7:30 pm. 8. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 7:30 pm. Linda C: grown, ctincrtity Clerk