The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2000-06-27; Housing & Redevelopment Commission; 326 Exhibit 2; South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment ProjectfY-6 3% EXHIBIT 2 South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project Report to the City Council June 20,2000 Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Commission 2965 Roosevett Street, Suite B Carlsbad, California 92008 ~ Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. 540 North Golden Circle, Suite 305 Santa Ana, California 92705 Phone: (714) 5414585 Fax: (714) 836-1 748 E-Mail: info@webrsg.com Introduction .................................................................................... I Contents of this Report ........................................................................................... I The Reasons for the Selection of the Project Area, Including a Description of Proposed Projects and How Such Projects Will Improve or Alleviate Blight .......................................................... A-I Geographic Boundaries ...................................................................................... A-2. A Determination as to Whether the Project Area is Predominately Urbanized .A4 Background ........................................................................................................ .A4 Blighting Conditions in Project Area ................................................................... A-7 How the Project Area is a Burden on the City .................................................... A-7 A Description of the Projects Proposed by the Commission .............................. A-8 A Description of How the Proposed Projects Will Improve and Alleviate Blight ........................................................................................................................... A-IO A Description of the Physical and Economic Conditions Existing in the Project Area .......................................................................... B-1 Legal Context of Blight ........................................................................................ B-I Blighting Conditions in the Project Area ............................................................. 8-4 Five-Year Implementation Plan .................................................... C-I Plan Goals .......................................................................................................... C-I Blighting Conditions ........................................................................................... C-2 Financial Resources .......................................................................................... C-4 Five-Year Programs and Expenditures ............................................................. C-5 An Explanation of Why the Elimination of Blight Cannot be Accomplished by Private Enterprise Acting Alone or Through Other Financing Alternatives Other Than Tax Increment Financing ....... D-I Method of Financing and Economic Feasibility of the Plan ............ E-I Projected Tax Increment Revenues ................................................................... E-3 Economic Feasibility Analysis ............................................................................. E4 The Method of Relocation ............................................................ F-I An Analysis of the Preliminary Plan ............................................. G-I The Report and Recommendations of the Planning Commission... H-I Report and Recommendation of the Project Area Committee ........ 1-1 A Statement of Conformance to the General Plan ......................... J-I The Environmental Impact Report ............................................... K-I Report of the County Fiscal Officer ............................................... L-I Neighborhood Impact Repolf.......................................................M-l .. A Summary of the Commission's Consultations with Affected Taxing Entities and a Response to Said Entities' Concerns Regarding the Plan, ........................................................................................... N-I Introduction This document is the Report to the City Council (“Report”) for the proposed Redevelopment Plan (“Plan”) for the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project (“Project”). The Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Commission . (“Commission”) is evaluating the Plan’s merits in addressing and alleviating physical and economic blighting conditions within the proposed South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project Area (“Project Area”). If adopted, the Plan would establish the 555.5-acre Project Area, which includes properties generally bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west, Interstate 5 to the east, the Agua Hedionda Lagoon to the north, and the southem.City limits to the south. This Report has been prepared in accordance with Section 33000 et. seq. of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California (the California Community Redevelopment Law or ”Redevelopment Law”). This Report represents the culmination of the documentation of the proposed Plan, having been preceded by the following documents. Preliminary Plan, 0 Draft Redevelopment Plan, Preliminary Report, 0 Owner Participation Rules 0 Relocation Guidelines, and 0 Program Environmental Impact Report This Report has been prepared by Commission staff and its redevelopment consultant, Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. (RSG). The contents of this Report are prescribed by Section 33352 of the Redevelopment Law, and accordingly have been divided into the following sections: SECTIONA. The Reasons for Selection of the Project Area, Including a Description of Proposed Projects and How Such Projects Will Improve or Alleviate Blight. SECTION B. A Description of the Physical and Economic Conditions Existing in the Project Area. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20.2000 - I - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL SECTION C. SECTION D. SECTION E. SECTION F. SECTION G. SECTION H. SECTION I. SECTION J. SECTION K. SECTION L. SECTION M. SECTION N. Five-Year Implementation Plan. An Explanation of Why the Elimination of Blight Cannot be Accomplished by Private Enterprise Acting Alone or Through Other Financing Alternatives Other Than Tax Increment Financing. Method of Financing and Economic Feasibility of the Plan. The Method of Relocation. An Analysis of the Preliminary Plan. The Report and Recommendations of the Planning Commission. Report and Recommendation of the Project Area Committee. A Statement of Conformance to the General Plan. The Environmental Impact Report. Report of the County Fiscal officer. Neighborhood Impact Report. A Summary of the Commission’s Consultations with Affected Taxing Entities and a Response to Said Entities’ Concerns Regarding the Plan. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDMLOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - II - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL The Reasons for Selection of the Project Area, lnduding a Description of Proposed Projects and How Such Projects Will Improve or Alleviate Blight This Section of this Report details the reasons for the selection of the Project Area. Redevelopment of the Project Area is desired to enable the Commission to: Facilitate interim improvements at the Encina power generating facility to reduce the 46-year old Plant's environmental and economic impacts on the community; Accommodate the economically viable redevelopment of the Encina Plant into a smaller, more efficient power generating Plant; Provide funding for the potential realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard which is currently being studied and could yield excess property that could facilitate public recreational facilities and improvements, including the expansion of the Carlsbad State Beach campgrounds, and; Promote the redevelopment of underutilized properties in the Ponto area. The Project Area is located within the City of Carlsbad. The City is located along the Pacific Ocean in North San Diego County, approximately 10 miles south of the Camp Pendelton Marine Corps Base. The City is adjoined by the City of Oceanside to the north, the City of Encinitas to the south, the Pacific Ocean to the west, and the Cities of San Marcos and Vista to the east. As of January 1999, the State Department of Finance estimated the City's population at 77,600. The 555.5-acre Project Area is generally bounded by the Pacific Ocean to the west, Interstate 5 to the east, the Agua Hedionda Lagoon to the north, and southern City limits to the south. Exhibit A-1 illustrates the boundaries of the Project Area: ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - A-1 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project Project Area Map Project Area Boundary For all redevelopment project areas established after January I , 1984 or areas added to project areas after January 1, 1984, Section 33320.1 of the Redevelopment Law requires that such areas be "predominantly urbanized" meaning that not less than 80 percent of the land in the project area: I) Has been or is developed for urban uses; 2) Is characterized by the existence of subdivided lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development that are in multiple ownership, or 3) Is an integral part of one or more areas developed for urban uses, which are surrounded or substantially surrounded by parcels which have been or are developed for urban uses. A total of 503.5 acres, or 90.63% of the Project Area, is urbanized. Urbanized areas include 471.24 acres (84.83%) that either have been or are currently developed and 32.46 acres (15.17%) that are integral of an urban area since they are immediately adjoined by developed parcels on at least three sides. Exhibit A-2 graphically depicts the location of urbanized and nonurbanized parcels in the Project Area. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - A4 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT .. South Carlsbad Coastal Red eve I o p rn e n t Project Urbanization Map Has been or is developed for urban uses. Not developed for urban uses. Is an integral part of one or more areas developed for urban uses. In September 1997, the City of Carlsbad began to identify options to eliminate or reduce the environmental and visual impacts of the Encina Power Plant and to achieve more compatible land uses along its coastline. The Encina Power Plant, located at Carlsbad Boulevard and Cannon Road, began operation in 1954. The facility was expanded throughout the 1970s and consists of five steam boiler units fired by natural gas and oil, and an on-site combustion turbine. Total generating capacity of the facility is 951 megawatts; such capacity creates energy to provide electricity to nearly one million households. In November 1997, San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) announced plans to auction the facility as California prepared to open up its electric utility industry to competition. In May 1999, SDG&E completed the sale of the facility, along with 253 megawatts of combustion turbine facilities to Dynegy Inc. and NRG Energy Inc. The Encina Power Plant is critical to the provision of power throughout the County because it is a designated ‘must-run” facility, meaning that it must be available to generate power during periods of peak demand, regardless of price and other factors. As the region experiences rapid growth, continued operation of Encina and other “must-run” facilities is even more essential to meet increased energy demand-demand for power that has already surpassed 1996 California Energy Commission projections for the year 2040, according to the San Diego Union Tribune. According to the operations vice president at the State’s Independent Systems Operations, a non-profit public corporation which manages and ensures equal electrical flow statewide, the County’s current energy systems will be unable to deliver power consistently by the year 2004. Among the tactics to expand power generating capabilities are to increase capacity and replace the Encina Plant with a more efficient facility. While increasing capacity to serve the San Diego County region, redevelopment of the existing Plant to a more efficient facility will also reduce emissions of harmful pollutants. - Prior to SDG&E’s transfer of ownership, pollutant byproducts generated by the facility were subject to generally less stringent environmental limits than what is permitted today. The Air Pollution Control District (APCD) permitted the Plant’s emissions to be measured in aggregate with other SDG&E facilities countywide. Had SDG&E retained ownership of Encina, the Plant would have been subject to a nitrogen oxide (NOx) limit of 1,100 tons per year until January 1, 2001, when the NOx limit would then have dropped to 417 tons per year. In addition, regulations stemming from the federal Clean Air Act of 1990 call for reduced emissions from power-generating facilities throughout the District. Specifically, these changes require operators of older facilities, like Cabrillo Power (the current operator of the Encina facility) to install emission control equipment that reduces NOx. There is a clause in APCD Rule 69 that requires the Encina boilers to meet an emission limit of 0.15 pounds per megawatt hour by January 1 , ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - A-5 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 2001 if Encina is sold. As noted, Encina was sold in May 1999 to Cabrillo Power, at that time, City staff reports that emissions from Units 4 and 5 ranged between 0.50 and 0.70 pounds per megawatt hour, while emissions from the older Units 1 , 2 and 3 ranged between 1.00 and 1.30 pounds per megawatt hour. Since assuming ownership of Encina, Cabrillo Power has initiated installation of low NOx burners on Units 4 and 5 that could reduce emissions to 0.30 to 0.31 pounds per megawatt hour, which is still double the permitted level of emissions. Under the current circumstances, Cabrillo Power will be required to ultimately retrofit all five of the Encina steam boiler units with Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) in order to meet the substantially reduced and more stringent APCD air emission standards. These new standards must be met by January 1, 2001 pursuant to APCD Rule 69. In recent APCD hearings, Cabrillo Power has been successful in its attempts to defer the necessary improvements to achieve the emission standards set forth by the APCD. Shortly after purchasing Encina, Cabrillo Power requested an extension for the timeframe to complete the installation of the SCR technology on all five units, from January 2001, to April 2003. Reluctantly, the APCD agreed with this extension in order to accommodate Cabrillo’s purported time constraints for installation of the new required emission control technology (SCR). Cabrillo Power has requested Rule 69 of the APCD regulations be modified to remove the megawatt hour restrictions and require only an annual cap on emissions for all five units. Effectively, this would permit Cabrillo Power to avoid installation of the SCR technology on some (units 1, 2 & 3) if not all of the units (units I-5), and would generate a much higher level of pollutants (1.3 pounds versus 0.15 pounds per megawatt hour) when operational in peak demand periods. Because the peak demand occurs during summer months when the air quality is particularly susceptible to pollutants, release of this high level of NOx (1.3 tons per megawatt hour) would significantly worsen the air quality for surrounding residents in the most sensitive time (summer) of the year. According to the City’s air quality consultant, release of NOx into the air has been linked to a variety of health problems, including lung and eye irritation, and is a precursor to ozone formation. - Although SCR retrofits to all five units would substantially reduce harmful air emissions, a more attractive alternative to the extended operation of the older units would be enabled by the proposed redevelopment project. By using the redevelopment project to facilitate the development of new, super-efficient replacement units instead of retrofitting the existing units, not only would greater air quality improvements be achieved, but also the process of decommissioning the existing Plant would be dramatically accelerated. The City’s air quality consultant estimates that a new facility would have the capacity to generate approximately 60% more power, with 30% less emissions, as compared to the existing facility with the SCR improvements. A replacement facility would be far more efficient than the existing facility, which is an incentive to Cabrillo Power. A replacement facility would be far more ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20.2000 - A-6 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL aesthetically and geographically desirable than the existing facility, which is an incentive to the community. By working together through the redevelopment project, the Commission and Cabrillo Power can accelerate the replacement of the existing Plant with a new facility that is substantially more desirable to all parties. The cost of the interim SCR improvements could be as much as $80 million, while a new replacement facility of similar size could cost between $500 and $600 million, according to HMH Resources, the City's utility consultant. Given that Cabrillo Power has not yet recovered its initial investment in purchasing the existing facility, achieving this second alternative could be a hardship on Cabrillo Power for the foreseeable future. As a result, until Cabrillo Power is capable of financing the needed improvements, the City will be burdened by the continued operation of the existing facility. SCR improvements would reduce the air emissions to a more acceptable level. However, due to the substantial cost, these interim improvements could ultimately limit the complete redevelopment of the site and eliminate the most desirable action related to demolition of the existing plant and construction of a new, more operationally efficient and cleaner burning facility. The Commission could both hasten the timing of the Plant's replacement (from 20 to 25 years to perhaps 12 -15 years), while facilitating additional buffering to reduce the aesthetic impacts on surrounding residential and recreational uses through redevelopment. Through a public-private partnership, the Commission and Cabrillo Power can collectively work together to achieve a better, cleaner facility, more effectively than Cabrillo Power could without redevelopment. - Also, redevelopment is sought to accommodate the redevelopment of the Ponto area. Specifically, the Commission aims to: Alleviate physical and economic blighting conditions; Address incompatible land uses; Promote economic development; and Ensure the existence of adequate public infrastructure. Predominately commercial and industrial in character, the Ponto area encompasses intermixed residential properties. When the City annexed this residentially zoned area from the County in 1964, many of the incompatible industrial uses already existed, including a junk yard and a trash facility operated by Coast Waste Management. While the trash facility has since closed, the junk yard operation continues to store old automobiles, parts, and other debris. The junk yard and other industrial businesses not only have a detrimental effect on homes in the area because of traffic, fumes, noise and other impacts, but the presence of residences also prevent the area from being developed to its full economic potential. The Commission could potentially provide funds for ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - A-7 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT infrastructure and site improvements; funds may also be used for relocating incompatible uses to more suitable locations in the City. Revitalization efforts within the Ponto area may also include assisting property owners with structural improvements since many buildings appear to be obsolete. These buildings were constructed between the 1950s and 1970s and have outlived their economic use. A field inspection of this area identified several industrial businesses operating out of structures designed for single and multi family residential use. Also, the area is subdivided into smaller parcels (the median lot size of the parcels in the area is less than 8,800 square feet), which is inadequate to accommodate industrial uses. The small parcels do not provide space for adequate storage, parking, and loading areas found in even the most marginal industrial districts. In addition, the Ponto area has experienced a 26% decline in secured (land and improvement) values since 1995-96. Over the same time period, secured values in the Cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, Oceanside, and Vista, as well as the overall County grew by over 18%. A major property owner in the Ponto area indicates that suspected hazardous contamination at a former junkyard and incompatible industrial uses discourage reinvestment. According to the Commission’s environmental consultant, Culbertson, Adams and Associates, Phase I environmental assessments of several properties in the Ponto area would most likely result in recommendations to complete additional testing, including soil samples, asbestos and lead-based paint studies, due to the presence of the junk yard, nursery, metal fabricating shop, and older buildings in the Ponto area. Given the nature of these uses, it is likely that the area contains some hazardous contamination, according to the City’s Planning Director. Testing for and remediation of contamination in the - Ponto area could be expensive, particularly since the area is designated for residential use that normally requires a higher level of remediation than other less sensitive uses. Upgrading the Ponto area will allow for the coordinated redevelopment of this area consistent with the City’s General Plan. Finally, redevelopment may also be used as a potential funding source for the needed Project Area infrastructure improvements, including off site improvements in the vicinity of the Encina Plant, Ponto Drive, and Carlsbad Boulevard. If approved by the City, the Carlsbad Boulevard project involves relocating the southbound lanes of this roadway eastward, to maximize the amount of public lands available for other uses. This project could also generate remnant properties that may be reused for additional recreational purposes to complement the adjacent Carlsbad State Beach. The Project Area is comprised of 43 parcels that the Commission is seeking to revitalize through a coordinated redevelopment effort. Section B of this Report describes the physical and economic blighting conditions found in the Project ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - A-8 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Area. Blighting conditions that will need to be addressed within the Project Area include: Buildings in which it is unsafe and unhealthy to live and work, including defective and deteriorating structures in the Ponto Area; Existing obsolete facilities at the Encina Power Plant which produce levels of NOx emissions which exceed acceptable standards as set forth by the Air Pollution Control Board for San Diego County, and significantly contribute to unhealthy air quality conditions within the community and surrounding areas; Factors hindering the economically viable use of Project Area properties, including obsolete and inefficient Power Plant facilities and undersized lots under multiple ownership in the Ponto area; Land use incompatibilities within the Ponto area that constrain development opportunities; Depreciated property values in the Ponto area, and impaired investments, due to the historic presence of uses containing hazardous materials in the Ponto area, as well as mixed character of uses within the Ponto area and economic constraints that prohibit conversion of the Encina Power Plant to a more efficient facility; Abandoned structures at the Encina power plant; and Inadequate public improvements throughout the Project Area. The Encina Plant currently represents an environmental liability for the City of Carlsbad. As one of the older generating Plants in the State, continued operation of the existing Encina facility, even with the SCR interim improvements, will not result in the removal or substantial upgrade of the Plants oldest units in terms of NOx emissions. As a result, the City's residents will continue to be subjected to elevated NOx emissions from these obsolete facilities, with no guarantee that Cabrillo Power can remove these units in the future due to economic concerns. In the Ponto area, efforts to rehabilitate properties to make them competitive are limited by the high cost of remodeling and retrofitting existing buildings. Poor economic and physical conditions place a burden on the community by reducing the City's ability to meet its goal of creating optimal land uses and development. Mitigating these deficiencies will require a highly concerted effort by both the community and private sector. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - A-9 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT This Plan provides a list of infrastructure and public facilities projects, which could be implemented by the Commission. Additionally, the Commission will also employ resources to fund a variety of affordable housing, property rehabilitation, and economic development activities. A list of the redevelopment projects and programs anticipated by the Commission is provided as Table A-I . As stated in Section E of this Report, the Project will allow the Commission to fund redevelopment implementation initiatives through project generated tax increment revenue. This revenue may be allocated to: I) Public Infrastructure and Facilities Improvements - $72 million 2) Commercial Rehabilitation and Economic Development Initiatives - $72 million 3) Housing Programs - $61 million Fund allocation to public infrastructure and facility improvement programs could be used to supplement City Capital Improvement Program funding and improve street, storm, drain, and sewer infrastructure within the Project Area. Furthermore, fund allocation for commercial rehabilitation and economic development incentives could result in high and best uses for Project Area properties and businesses. - The Commission will allocate 20 percent of the project generated tax increment revenue to those activities that increase and improve the community’s supply of affordable housing. Redevelopment Law allows the Commission to expend these funds both inside and outside the Project Area. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CrrY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - A-IO - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Housing Programs Increase and improve the community’s supply of affordable housing for very low, low, and moderate income households. Projects include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Citywide Housing Programs: The Commission will invest housing set-aside funds into affordable housing rehabilitation and development projects throughout the City. Infrastructure Programs Improve pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic flows, upgrade utilities and drainage systems, enhance public safety, and promote recreational opportunities. Projects include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Carlsbad Boulevard: Realign and construct sidewalks, gutters, and other road improvements from Manzano Drive to the Batiquitos Lagoon. Palomar Airport Road: Widen road and reconstruct existing overpasses from Carlsbad Boulevard to Avenida Encinas. Ponto Drive/Carlsbad Boulevard Frontage Roads: Construct curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street lights. Poinsettia Drive: Widen road and bridge from Carlsbad Boulevard to Avenida Encinas. Waterline Upsizing: Upsize approximately 560 feet of 6-inch waterline on Avenida Encinas near Cannon Road. Waterline Replacement: Replace approximately 2,500 feet of 1 0-inch waterline along Carlsbad Boulevard north of Palomar Airport Road. Waterline Installation: Install various line sizes along Carlsbad Boulevard. Public Facility Programs Develop and renovate community facilities that meet the needs of both the Project Area and City. Such projects include, but are not limited to, the following: I. Parks and Other Cultural and/or Recreational Facilities 2. Public Safety Facilities 3. Public Works Facilities Property Rehabilitation and Economic Development Programs Implement projects that result in the redevelopment of obsolete structures, cleanup contaminated properties, consolidate irregular lots under mixed ownership, and facilitate development of modem industrial, commercial, and utility facilities. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - A-I 1 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT The Commission will undertake a comprehensive redevelopment program through implementing the Plan. The authorities and provision of the Plan have been developed to permit the Commission to enact redevelopment projects that target blighting conditions in the Project Area. The Commission will work with property and business owners to design and implement specific redevelopment initiatives. Community Development Proiects and Programs. These activities are designed to address blighting conditions by assisting business and property owners with rehabilitation, expansion, or acquisition activities. The Commission proposes to provide funds to assist in land acquisition and on- and off-site infrastructure improvements. As existing structures age, the Commission proposes to provide assistance over the life of the Plan to facilitate their rehabilitation. Such programs will enable the Commission to redevelop substandard properties in a manner consistent with the General Plan. These programs will allow the Commission to facilitate viable development of local and regional serving facilities in the Project Area. Infrastructure and Public Facilities Improvements. Traffic and circulation improvements include those that have been identified in various City commissioned studies. Plan implementation will necessitate additional studies to identify additional infrastructure improvement needs. HousindLow and Moderate Income Assistance. Housing fund expenditures will assist the City in implementing the goals and programs set forth in the Commission’s Affordable Housing Compliance Plan and Housing Element of the City’s General Plan. Proposed affordable housing activities will enhance housing opportunities for very low, low, and moderate income households. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - A-12 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT A Description of the Physical and Economic Conditions Existing in the Project Area The Project Area contains both physical and economic blighting conditions that necessitate the creation of the Project. Conditions in the Project Area include: Buildings in which it is unsafe and unhealthy to live and work, including defective and deteriorating structures in the Ponto Area; Existing obsolete facilities at the Encina Power Plant which produce levels of NOx emissions which exceed acceptable standards as set forth by the Air Pollution Control Board for San Diego County, and significantly contribute to unhealthy air quality conditions within the community of Carlsbad and surrounding areas. Factors hindering the economically viable use of Project Area properties, including obsolete and inefficient Power Plant facilities and undersized lots under multiple ownership in the Ponto area; Land use incompatibilities within the Ponto area that constrain development opportunities; Depreciated property values in the Ponto area, and impaired investments, due to the historic presence of uses containing hazardous materials in the Ponto area, as well as mixed character of uses within the Ponto area and economic constraints that prohibit conversion of the Encina Power Plant to a more efficient facility; Abandoned structures at the Encina power plant; and Inadequate public improvements throughout the Project Area. This Section of the Report describes the findings of blight in the Project Area. Overall, 27 (63%) of the 43 urbanized parcels in the Project Area contain physically and/or economically blighted properties. Exhibit B-1 presents the geographic location of blight within the Project Area. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - B-1- SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT South Carlsbad Coas ta I Redevelopment Project Blight Map Encina Power Plant Area Abandoned buildings. Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of lots. Incompatible uses that prevent economic development. Stagnant property values and/or impaired investments. Obsolete utility facility which produces NOx emissions that exceed acceptable standards. Ponto Area Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of lots. Inadequate public improvements. Incompatible uses that prevent economic development. Stagnant property values and/or impaired investments. Unsafe or unhealthy buildings for persons to live or work. Project Area Boundary Sections 33030 through 33039 of Redevelopment Law describe conditions that constitute blight in a redevelopment project area. A blighted area is one that necessitates the creation of a redevelopment project area, because the combination of conditions in an area constitute a burden on the community, and cannot be alleviated by private enterprise, governmental action, or both. A project area must have both physical and economic blighting conditions, as defined in Section 33031 (a) and (b), respectively: Physical blight includes the following: I) Buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. These conditions can be caused by serious building code violations, dilapidation and deterioration, defective design or physical construction, faulty or inadequate utilities, or other similar factors. 2) Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. This condition can be caused by a substandard design, inadequate size given present standards and market conditions, lack of parking, or other similar factors. 3) Adjacent or nearby uses that are incompatible with each other and which prevent the economic development of those parcels or other portions of a project area. 4) The existence of subdivided lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development that are in multiple ownership. Economic blight includes the following: Depreciated or stagnant property values or impaired investments, including, but not necessarily limited to, those properties containing hazardous wastes. Abnormally high business vacancies, abnormally low lease rates, high turnover rates, abandoned buildings, or excessive vacant lots within an area developed for urban use and served by utilities. A lack of necessary commercial facilities that are normally found in neighborhoods, including grocery stores, drug stores, and banks and other lending institutions. Residential overcrowding or an excess of bars, liquor stores, or other businesses that cater exclusively to adults, that has led to problems of public safety and welfare. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - 8-3 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL 5) A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. Section 33030(c) of the Redevelopment Law also states that a blighted area may be one that contains inadequate public improvements, facilities, or utilities when other blighting conditions are present. This section presents a detailed analysis of blighting conditions within the Project Area. The analysis is based upon a series of field inspections of the Project Area, discussions with City officials, Cabrillo Power officials, Project Area property owners and business tenants, and research and analysis of local and regional economic data. Appendix A to this Report includes photographs of some of the conditions in the Project Area. Encina Power Plant Existing Physical and Economic Conditions As discussed in Section A, the 46 year old Encina Power Plant will soon be undergoing interim retroffiing to reduce overall emissions to meet Air Pollution Control District (APCD) standards. However, at this time these improvements are not proposed to remove or significantly reconstruct the older, more noxious units (units 1, 2 & 3) at the Encina Plant. These units, while used only when peak demand warrants, have surpassed their useful life, and are far less efficient as compared to modem facilities. When operational, which is more intense during the summer months, pollutants emitted into the air include principally nitrogen oxide and carbon monoxide. - The Encina power facility contains 5 main generating units constructed at various times over the past 46 years. These generating units are not as efficient as state- of-the-art units, and generate more pollutants than modem generating Plants. Indeed, under today’s standards, a generating Plant solely relying on the design of the older units could not meet current pollution thresholds. However, unlike newer facilities, retrofitting the Encina Plant will cause Cabrillo Power to use more hazardous materials on-site (specifically ammonia) to reduce emissions. Presently, the Encina Power Plant is being operated in a manner which continues to significantly contribute to unhealthy air quality conditions within the community of Carlsbad and the surrounding areas . Under the 1990 federal Clean Air Act, air districts either had to work to achieve lower emissions to the Act‘s standards, or, in the instance of the County APCD, achieve a lesser reduction pursuant to’Rule 69. Encina currently does not comply with the reductions mandated by the County APCD and Rule 69, and Cabrillo Power has not been able to install the ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - 8-4 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT necessary equipment to mitigate the Plants air quality impacts on surrounding neighborhoods to their lowest levels through selective catalytic reduction (SCR) technology. Cabrillo Power received approval from the APCD to delay by more than two years (from January 2001 to March 2003 on all five units) installation of the necessary SCR equipment to reduce NOx emissions, and has submitted a formal request to the APCD to eliminate the per megawatt restrictions which could substantially reduce emissions during sensitive periods in the summer. In order to actively participate in the APCD hearings, the City retained Bill Powers an air quality consultant, to advise City staff on the technical aspects of the Plant‘s emissions. In his June 5, 2000 report to the City of Carlsbad, Mr. Powers indicated that without the 0.15 pounds per megawatt hour cap, “NOx emissions from the [Encina power] plant will be over five times higher during peak electricity demand.. .generally between June and September of each year.” During a typical 12 hour peak generation period, actual NOx emissions from Encina are currently 8,500 pounds for all 5 boiler units, versus the 1,700 pounds under the stricter limits required by the existing Rule 69. (A copy of Mr. Powers report is enclosed as Appendix A to this Report) A copy of Mr. Powers report was forwarded to the APCD together with a cover letter from the City in response to the request to the APCD to amend Rule 69. The City remains concerned that an amendment to Rule 69 could have a negative long term impact on air quality for the Carlsbad community and surrounding area. Currently, without the stricter limitations on the Plant’s emissions, a major opportunity to improve the summertime air quality in Carlsbad will be lost. Cabrillo Power is pursuing a course that raises concern with the City and its air quality expert because it potentially averts any change in the level of excessive emissions during sensitive peak operating periods. - Even if Cabrillo Power did elect to comply with the installation of the SCR technology needed to bring emissions to current APCD standards, any future reductions in emission caps could render the Encina facility useless or inoperable, according to Greg Hughes, Plant Manager at Cabrillo Power. During a May 18, 2000 tour of the Encina Plant, Mr. Hughes indicated that SCR improvements would assist in bringing the Plant’s emissions to the lowest possible levels and help it meet current APCD standards. However, Mr. Hughes also stated that it is highly unlikely that the five boiler units could be modified further to reduce emission levels below the current proposed APCD caps without complete replacement of all five units. Thus, Mr. Hughes concluded that a new, more efficient plant would be needed in order to achieve any further reductions in emission standards beyond those established by Rule 69 today. Apart from these health impacts, operating the 46-year old Plant is not currently economically viable. Because of its obsolete design, the City’s utility consultant, HMH Resources, estimates the Encina Power Plant requires 50% more energy to generate the same level of power as a contemporary facility. Higher energy needs equate to more fuel usage and higher operational costs. According to the utility consultant, Cabrillo Power receives financial support from the Independent Systems Operator (ISO), a nonprofit public benefit corporation established under ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - 8-5 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL California electric industry deregulation legislation and charged with the oversight and management of the electricity transmission grid in the state. The utility consultant estimates that the IS0 subsidized approximately one-third of the annual operating revenue to Encina, roughly $30 million per year. As compared to the existing Encina facility, HMH Resources estimates that a new, state-of-the- art and more efficient facility would not need financial support from the ISO. Other conditions at the Encina facility include the existence of two abandoned oil storage facilities that are currently not being used according to the Encina Plant Manager. According to Encina’s Plant Manager, these two storage tanks would need repair and upgrades in order to be put into use again at a later date if required for operations. How Conditions are a Burden on the Community Encina adjoins residential neighborhoods, beaches, the Agua Hedionda Lagoon that are subjected to both the Plant‘s emissions, as well as the units’ aesthetic impacts, as the 400 foot tall facility is clearly visible from single family homes, a public park, and Carlsbad State Beach. Per the Environmental Impact Report, prepared by Culbertson, Adams & Associates, various hazardous materials are used at the plant including petroleum fuels and water treatment chemicals, such as ammonia. Currently, NOx emissions are more than double the January I, 2001 limits (0.15 pounds per megawatt hour) set forth by the APCD, subjecting the community to harmful affects of NOx on a daily basis, specifically during the summer months. According to the City’s air quality consultant, exposure to NOx can lead to lung and eye initation, and NOx emissions are a precursor to even more serious ozone affects. Also, the Plant‘s massive size is out of scale with the much lower profile character of the surrounding properties. Replacement of this Plant with a physically smaller, more efficient and cleaner burning facility would mitigate these environmental and visual impacts on the community. ~ Why Conditions Cannot be Alleviated by Private Enterprise or Governmental Action In order to undertake improvements at the Encina Plant, Cabrillo Power needs to generate operating revenue that exceeds the costs to both operate the existing Plant and amortize the acquisition cost. An operating proforma prepared by HMH Resources estimates that the current operation is anticipated to require both a substantial level of IS0 assistance and corporate subsidy from other operations for the next 20 years. Over this time period, the operating proforma estimates that IS0 support for the Plant could reach $296 million, or 9.4% of the total operating budget over the twenty year period. According to the City’s utility consultant, these IS0 subsidies are not guaranteed, and can be terminated altogether with a 90 day notice. With IS0 support, after payment of operating and debt service costs, HMH Resources estimates that the Plant is currently operating at a 23.4% loss annually, or $769 million over the 20 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - B-6 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL year period. Without the IS0 support, this loss could increase to 32.4% annually, or approximately $1.066 billion over a 20 year period.’ A summary of this “business as usual case” is presented below: Itern Revenues With IS0 Support 20 Year Totals Without IS0 Support 20 Year Totals 2.799.377.226 85.2% 2.502.605.901 76.1% IS0 support Energy Sales 296,771,325 9.0% 0.0% 2,502,605,901 76.1% 2,502,605,901 76.1% Expenditures 3,287,518,623 100.0% 3,287,518,623 100.0% Fuel Operations Maintenance Adrninstrative lnsurance/Taxes 2,881,950,412 87.7% 2,881,950,412 87.7% 165,015,275 5.0% 165,015,275 5.0% 26,820,814 0.8% 26,820,814 0.8% 26,837,856 0.8% 26,837,856 0.8% 186,894,266 5.7% 1 86,894,266 5.7% Operating Margin (488,141,397) -14.8% (784,912,722) -23.9% Financng Costs 281,763,511 8.6% 281,763,511 8.6% ProfiffLoss Margin (769,904,908) -23.4% (1,066,676,233) -32.4% - Source: HMH Resouces, May 1999 The above analysis does not assume the SCR improvements are installed at the current facility. As indicated earlier, the cost of the SCR installation could be as much as $80 million. In their variance petition dated September 7, 1999, Cabrillo Power indicated that installation of the SCR technology as required by Rule 69 could not be achieved ”without extreme hardship to its business and the people of San Diego County.. .” Cabrillo Power‘s petition also indicated that, based on their own analysis, the total cost of installing the SCR is “in excess of what would be normally be considered acceptable when compared to the NOx emissions achieved.. .I’ Based on Cabrillo Power‘s petition, it is evident that they believe that the cost of installing the SCR improvements is not financially viable. Cabrillo Power and the City, as well as the Environmental Health Coalition, share the same long-term desire to convert the Encina Power Plant to a new, physically smaller facility that both generates electricity more economically, and does not rely on half-century old generating equipment. However, achieving this objective is constrained by acquisition, operational, and interim improvement costs that ‘ The proforma analysis prepared by HMH Resources, lnc, indudes certain assumptions and estimates based on generally available industry information. Cabrillo Power has not provided or reviewed the assumptions or estimates used in the proforma. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20.2000 - 8-7 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL prohibit Cabrillo Power from investing the $500 to $600 million needed to construct a new replacement facility. Discussions with Cabrillo Power representatives indicate that these financial constraints inhibit substantial capital investment for potentially the next 12 years, assuming the price of power can then support the needed improvements. By that time, some of the Encina units would be nearly 60 years old. Should the price of energy not generate sufficient capital to invest in a new facility, Cabrillo Power would need to defer construction of a replacement Plant indefinitely. Redevelopment can both hasten the development of a new power facility, and accommodate the City’s desires for a less obtrusive Plant. Through a joint partnership between the Commission and Cabrillo Power, the Commission can consider providing tax increment revenue to assist Cabrillo Power to underwrite on and off site costs associated with a new facility. A physically smaller replacement facility could generate the same level of power using 50% less energy, while reducing emissions to APCD requirements. Also, the Commission can consider assisting with hazardous materials remediation, demolition of existing improvements, and construction of new infrastructure. Ponto Area Existing Physical and Economic Conditions The Ponto area comprises approximately 12 acres of the Project Area, and includes a variety of incompatible uses remaining after the City annexed this area in September 1964. Since annexation, the Ctty has tried to address land use and environmental problems in this area stemming from the County’s land use policies that led to the blighting conditions still evident today. Blighting conditions in this area include buildings in which it is unsafe to work, mixed ownership of lots of irregular shape form and size, incompatible land uses, and impaired investments due to depreciated values and suspected hazardous contamination. These conditions are described below, as well as depicted in the photo survey contained in Appendix B. - According to City staff, the Ponto area has been confronted with problems since annexation. Although designated and subdivided for residential uses, the area is contains many nonconforming industrial uses, including a former junk yard, kennel, and industrial service facilities, that date back prior to annexation. Because ownership is highly subdivided (12 different owners own the 23 parcels in this area) and the lot sizes are relatively small (median lot sizes are less than 8,800 square feet), rezoning this area into industrial use is not feasible. (Industrial developments today typically require at least one acre lot sizes to accommodate parking, loading, and storage.) As such, the nonconforming uses have been allowed to continue by the City’s’ zoning, but were not permitted to intensify or expand. The City’s efforts to mitigate and abate the land use problems (including illegal vehicle storage, nonpermitted uses, and illegal camping) have been stymied by the general unwillingness of property owners to file code enforcement reports on one another in this small area, according to the City‘s Planning and Building Directors. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20.2000 - 6-8 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL Indeed, part of the problem is that Ponto industrial uses that are characterized with unscreened storage, limited parking, substandard lot sizes, and inadequate loading areas that cannot be accommodated elsewhere in the City in their current condition. Thus, Ponto area enterprises would face higher costs associated with better facilities and larger, more suitable sites in other Cadsbad locations. Although many businesses would benefrt from these improvements, these incompatible uses have remained in the Ponto area for years, and evidently do not have the resources to invest in larger, more suitable locations. Redevelopment, however, can assist these businesses afford to relocate to better areas, thereby removing land use incompatibilities in the Ponto area. The Ponto area is a highly subdivided area containing a variety of industrial, storage, and residential uses. The median lot size in this area is less than 8,800 square feet, sufficient for only residential use as permitted under the current zoning. (Many of these lots were reduced by more than one-third of their original size decades ago when Carlsbad Boulevard was widened.) However, only 5 of the 23 parcels in this area are developed with residential uses. Again, since the area’s multiple ownership and small parcel sizes are not suitable for industrial use, rezoning the area to industrial use is not feasible. Multiple ownership, coupled with the small size of these lots inhibits private redevelopment of this area to remove the incompatible uses. Ownership of the small 12-acre area is split among 12 different property owners; and 8 of the 12 owners own only one parcel. Consolidating these parcels to alleviate the mixed character of the area would be particularly complex and costly, since it is typically more expensive to acquire small parcels, especially when different property owners are involved. Given the constraints of multiple ownership and small lots, it is not surprising that the Ponto area has not yet recycled into a more compatible district. - One of the problems of this area is that none of the various uses functions well. For the industrial uses, many are operating out of small buildings on lots subdivided for single-family residential use. Present industrial development standards typically call for lots of at least 40,000 square feet, or four times more than the Ponto area’s subdivision pattern. Other parcels contain storage uses, both open and enclosed; these uses do not have adequate screening from both the adjoining residential units and the Carlsbad Boulevard scenic corridor. Residential uses, for which this area was subdivided and designated, are surrounded by these incompatible uses. In total, 81 % of the Ponto area contains incompatible uses. In addition, another 8% of the area contains nonconforming industrial uses in this residentially designated area. Table 6-2 provides a listing of the incompatible uses within the Ponto area. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - B-9 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PONTO DRIVE LAND USE BREAKDOWN SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Parcel Parcel Parcel Land Use Adjacent Incompatible General Size Uses Plan Desig. (Ac.) Incompatible Parcels 1 214-160-04 0.24 2 214-160-05 0.17 3 214-160-06 0.15 4 214-160-13 0.97 5 214-160-20 0.20 6 214-160-24 2.75 7 214-160-25 1.52 8 214-160-27 0.18 9 214-160-28 0.92 10 214-160-29 0.91 11 214-160-34 0.13 12 214-160-35 0.14 13 214-160-36 0.16 Industrial Single Family Res. Industrial Kennel Parking/Storage Res Lot/Right of Way Self Storage Single Family Res. Outdoor Storage Industrial Res. Lot Single Family Res. Single Family Res. Single Family Res. I nd ust riallSe1 f Storage Single Family Res. Res Lot. Res Lot. Industrial/Kennel Single Family Res. Self Storage Single Family Res. Res Lot. Industrial/Self Storage Self Storage Self Storage 14 214-160-19 0.91 Res. Lot Parking/Storage Total area 9.35 acres Res iden tia I Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential 81% of Ponto Dr. parcels Breakdown of IncompatiblelCornpatible Parcels, by Acres 11% Incompatible Parcel! OCompatible, but 1 Nonconforming tMCompatible and i Conforming The City and Commission’s goal is to use redevelopment in the Ponto area to facilitate conversion of the area to uses consistent with the General Plan. Redevelopment tools would be essential to assist nonconforming uses relocate to more suitable facilities, mitigate hazardous contamination problems, and promote ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. JUNE 20, 2000 CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL - 6-10 - the development of permitted uses, compatible with the area’s physical layout and ownership pattern Other problems found in this area include deferred maintenance, as indicated by widespread decay and physical neglect. RSG’s field survey identified that 50% of the buildings within the Ponto area were dilapidated or deteriorated. Examples of the physical conditions include a residence at 7204 Ponto Drive, characterized by peeling paint, damaged exterior building materials, a deteriorated roof, and exposed utilities, an aging and weathered industrial structure at 7250 Ponto Drive, and an industrial use at 7200 Ponto Drive, where damaged and rusted corrugated metal fencing is visible from surrounding properties. Many properties lack of adequate spacing for ingress/egress, on site parking, and storage. An example of this deficiency includes the limited width and egresshgress of the Ponto Drive frontage road. Properties along the road provide limited access points and parking for business patrons and/or employees. Other areas where access is a serious condition include the unimproved right-of- way between the railroad tracks and Ponto Drive. This private right-of-way lacks pavement, drainage and lighting, yet is the only means to access the parcels that do not front Ponto Drive. During rainy weather, the unpaved roadway may prohibit vehicular access. Impaired investments and depreciated property values also afflict Ponto area properties. RSG’s interviews with City staff and Ponto property owners indicate that there is a significant concern about hazardous contamination in the area, due to the junk and auto wrecking yard (APN 214-160-28), the closed Coast Waste Management yard (APN 214-160-04 through 214-160-21), and other older industrial uses in the area. The Planning Director indicates there is no evidence of any cleanup effort of the hazardous materials associated with Ponto area industrial uses. According to Dianne Bathgate of Culbertson, Adams, and Associates (the Commission’s environmental consultant) the existing and previous known land uses and age of the buildings in the area, will require additional environmental testing on an individual project basis before any development could proceed. In addition, because residential reuse of these properties requires a higher level of remediation than nonresidential uses, development of this area pursuant to the General Plan could be particularly costly and time consuming. - Economic blight is also evident in the Ponto area, due to declining property values as shown by historic trends in assessed values over the past several years. Since fiscal year 1995-96, the total secured assessed value of the Ponto area has decreased by 26%. Over the same period, assessed values in the Cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, Oceanside, and Vista, as well as the County of San Diego, have all appreciated between 18% and 51%. These values indicate that despite its coastal location, Ponto area properties generally are not benefiting from the local or regional appreciation in secured assessed values experienced throughout the County. Table B-3 summarizes assessed value statistics for the Ponto area and other communities between 1995-96 and 1999-00. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. JUNE 20.2000 CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL - 6-1 1 - HISTORIC ASSESSED VALUE CHANGES PONTO AREA VS. CITY AND COUNTY Location FY 1995-96 PI 1999-00 Total Change Secured Value Secured Value Value % Ponto Dr. Area $4,012,474 $2,981,957 ($1,030,517) -26% City of Carlsbad 5,765,355,619 8,713,534,437 $2,948,178,818 51% City of Oceanside 6,458,165,554 7,610,650,987 $1,152,485,433 18% City of Encinitas 4,029,665,126 5,029,321,477 $999,656,351 25% City of Vista 3,4 1 5,346,896 4,061,774,306 $646,427,410 19% County of San Diego 132,042,481,093 161,465,428,244 $29,422,947,151 22% Source: San Diego County Assessment Roll Inadequate public improvements are also a problem that constrains redevelopment in the Ponto area. Prior to annexation in 1964, the County permitted development to occur in the Ponto area without complete public infrastructure, including inadequate storm drains, unpaved road surfaces, and sewer systems. While surrounding development outside the area assisted in providing improvements to the storm drain system, road and sewer system improvements are not expected without redevelopment, since many of the properties in the area are already developed, and the City cannot levy development fees to fund these improvements in previously improved areas. As a result, the Ponto area lacks paved roadways and relies on an antiquated septic - system for sewage service. In order for redevelopment to proceed in the Ponto area, inadequate infrastructure will need to be addressed. How Conditions are a Burden on the Community As the Ponto area languishes in limbo between residential and nonconforming uses, residents in the area are subjected to noise, air, and congestion created by incompatible industrial and storage uses. These factors diminish its suitability to be used for residential use. Further, industrial businesses in this area would benefit from locating in developments designed to better accommodate their needs for parking, storage, and access, because they would enable the businesses to more effectively operate their businesses and would adjoin other industrial uses rather than more sensitive residential uses. - The conditions in the area have stalled private efforts to redevelop the area for decades. RSG interviewed Mr. Lou Taschner, an attorney of property owner Dale Schreiber, who reported that development of his parcels was inhibited by the adjoining junk yard, as well as the proliferation of incompatible industrial uses in the area. Mr. Taschner went on to say that his client was very concerned about hazardous contamination, given the historic use of the area for auto wrecking, junk storage, and other industrial uses. As a result, Mr. Schriber's efforts to redevelop his property have been on hold since acquiring the property in 1972 ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - 6-12 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL until the City can more proactively address the problems of nonconforming uses in the area and the inadequate infrastructure. Why Conditions Cannot be Alleviated by Private Enterprise or Governmental Action The City has attempted to address Ponto area blighting conditions with little success since annexing the area in 1964. For example, internal correspondence dating back to 1978 indicated that Ponto area properties have been a continuing problem for the City since annexation. The City has attempted to work with property owners to abate illegal uses and junk yard operations at this location, but the owners have been unable or unwilling to cooperate. The City’s attempts to regulate uses in the area are curtailed by constraints such as tall block walls (at least 8-feet in height) that surround parcels and create a situation where activities on site are not visible. Accessing properties such as these would require a search warrant initiated by a complaint signed by a local resident or property owner. Since Ponto area property owners are a small group of owners isolated from much of the City, many owners and residents are reluctant to file complaints with the City and especially against each other. Property owners are discouraged from reinvesting in their properties, due to the mixed character of the area, small lot sizes, and substandard condition of the Ponto area. In other areas where these factors are not present, property owners have an economic incentive to invest in their property-namely to see its value appreciate. However, the Ponto area has not experienced a recycling of obsolete and substandard uses. In order for the area to develop as a residential area (pursuant to its designation under the General Plan), many parcels would need to be consolidated among several owners. Even if one property owner was to upgrade their property, there are no assurances that adjoining property owners will follow suit. As a result, the area continues to decline and property values are impaired. Clearly, the high costs involved in upgrading and rehabilitating existing structures and infrastructure have caused buildings to deteriorate to a state of disrepair. Removing blighting conditions will require a concerted effort by both the community and private sector. Given the fragile economic condition of the businesses and residents in this area, these efforts may include rehabilitation grants and loans. Neither entity acting alone possesses the ability or resources to remediate the blighting conditions of the Ponto area. Inadequate Public Improvements The Project Area is also characterized with substandard public facilities that may be addressed through implementation of a redevelopment program in the Project Area. A listing of the potential public facility/infrastructure projects is included in both the Plan, and Section A herein. Among these improvements is the potential realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard. This project would relocate the intersection of Carlsbad Boulevard and Palomar Airport Road to permit better vehicular circulation through the Project Area. In addition, this project wauld yield remnant ~ ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - 8-13 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT properties adjoining Carlsbad State Beach that may be redeveloped for recreational uses. Other pubic improvement needs in the Project Area include replacement of the septic system and road reconstruction in the Ponto area. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - 8-14 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FmYear Implementation Plan This Section presents the Fwe-Year Implementation Plan (“Implementation Plan”) for the Project. If the Redevelopment Plan is adopted by the City Council, then this Implementation Plan will guide the Commission as it implements specific redevelopment projects in the Project Area. If adopted, this Implementation Plan will be in place for the next five years (fiscal years 2000-01 to 2004-2005). Midway after its adoption, the Commission must seek community input, and review and update this Implementation Plan. This Implementation Plan has been prepared pursuant to Section 33490 of the Redevelopment Law. Since 1994, every redevelopment agency has been required to prepare an implementation plan that outlines the projects and expenditures the agency will undertake to address blight in a redevelopment project area. Implementation plans are initially formulated and subsequently updated through a legally mandated process that incorporates extensive public input. The purpose is to inject more public input into the programs a redevelopment agency implements to address blight in a redevelopment project area. - Pursuant to Sections 33352(c) and 33490 of the Redevelopment Law, this Implementation Plan presents the following: 0 The Commission’s major goals and objectives for the Project Area. 0 The programs, projects, and estimated expenditures planned for the next five years. 0 An explanation of how the programs, projects and expenditures will achieve the Commission’s goals and eliminate blight in the Project Area. 0 An explanation of how the programs, projects, and expenditures will implement the affordable housing requirements of the Redevelopment Law and will increase, improve, and preserve the supply of housing affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households. Section 400 of the Plan delineates the Commission’s redevelopment goals and objectives for the Project Area. These goals and objectives, which are listed below, were employed to formulate the overall strategy for this Implementation Plan and will serve as a guide for the Commission’s activities during the next five years. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - GI- SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL e e e e e e e e e e e e Eliminating blight and environmental deficiencies in the Project Area. Assembling of land into parcels suitable for modern, integrated development with improved pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the Project Area. Replanning, redesigning, and developing properties which are stagnant or improperly utilized. Increasing, improving, and preserving the community’s supply of housing affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households. Developing new beach and coastal recreational opportunities. Facilitating the redevelopment of the Encina power generating facility to a physically smaller, more efficient power generating Plant. Funding the Carlsbad Boulevard realignment which will yield excess property that could facilitate expansion of the Carlsbad State Beach campgrounds and other recreational facilities, and/or development of cultural facilities or other public facilities. Retaining as many existing businesses as possible by means of redevelopment and rehabilitation activities. Enhancing commercial and recreational functions in the Project Area. Strengthening the economic base of the Project Area and the community by the installation of needed on- and off-site improvements to stimulate new commerciaVindustrial expansion, employment, and economic growth. Increasing parking and open spaces amenities. Implementing performance criteria to assure quality site design environmental standards to provide unity and integrity to the entire Project Area development. The Project Area is being established to address conditions of physical and economic blight. Sections 33030 and 33031 of the Redevelopment Law define physical and economic blight as: ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - C-2 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Physical blight includes the following: Buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. These conditions can be caused by serious building code violations, dilapidation and deterioration, defective design or physical construction, faulty or inadequate utilities, or other similar factors. 0 Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. This condition can be caused by a substandard design, inadequate size given present standards and market conditions, lack of parking, or other similar factors. Adjacent or nearby uses that are incompatible with each other and which prevent the economic development of those parcels or other portions of the project area. 0 The existence of subdivided lots of irregular form and shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development that are in multiple ownership. Economic blight includes the following: Depreciated or stagnant property values or impaired investments, including, but not necessarily limited to, those properties containing hazardous wastes that require the use of Commission authority. Abnormally high business vacancies, abnormally low lease rates, high turnover rates, abandoned buildings, or excessive vacant lots within an area developed for urban use and served by utilities. A lack of necessary commercial facilities that are normally found in neighborhoods, including grocery stores, drug stores, and banks and other lending institutions. Residential overcrowding or an excess of bars, liquor stores, or other businesses that cater exclusively to adults, that has led to problems of public safety and welfare. A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and welfare. The Law also provides that deficient public improvements may be identified as a blighting condition under circumstances including the presence of physical and economic blight. The Commission’s goals and objectives and the programs and projects presented in this Implementation Plan are designed to alleviate and/or eliminate blight in the Project Area, as described in Section B of this Report. In general, they include the following: ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - C-3 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL UnsafeLJnhealthy Buildings: Buildings in which it is unsafe and unhealthy to live and work, including defective and deteriorating structures in the Ponto Area; Existing obsolete facilities at the Encina Power Plant: These facilities produce levels of NOx emissions which exceed acceptable standards as set forth by the Air Pollution Control Board for San Diego County, and significantly contribute to unhealthy air quality conditions within the community and surrounding areas; Factors Hindering Viable Use: Factors hindering the economically viable use of Project Area properties, including obsolete and inefficient Power Plant facilities and undersized lots under multiple ownership in the Ponto area; Incompatible Uses: Land Use incompatibilities within the Ponto area that constrain development opportunities Depreciated Valuedlmpaired Investments: Depreciated property Values in the Ponto area, and impaired investments, due to the historic presence of uses containing hazardous materials in the Ponto area, as well as economic constraints that prohibit conversion of the Encina Power Plant to a more efficient facility; Abandoned structures: Abandoned structures at the Encina power plant; and Inadequate Public Improvements: Inadequate public impr0VementS throughout the Project Area. ~ ~ ~~ ~ The following table presents a projection of revenues the Commission may have available over the next five years to fund the Implementation Plan activities. The projections are based on the financial analysis included in Section E of this Report. Table C-I presents the annual projected gross tax increment receipts, low and moderate housing set-aside requirement, statutory payments to affected taxing entities, and the remaining net revenues allocated to non-housing projects. Over the first five years of the Plan, the Commission is anticipated to collect $765,679 in housing fund revenue and $2,297,037 million in non-housing fund revenue. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - C-4 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL Fiscal Year Gross Tax Taxing Nonhousing Funds Housing Funds Increment Agency Revenue Payments Annual Cumulative Annual Cumulative 2000-01 2001-02 608,254 128,300 364,953 364,953 121,651 121,651 2002-03 981,506 205,456 588,903 953,856 196,301 317,952 2003-04 1,055,222 223,313 633,133 1,586,989 21 1,044 528,996 2004-05 1,183,413 254,335 710,048 2,297,037 236,683 765,679 (No Revenue Received Until FY 2001-02) Source: Section E of Report to the City Council ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - C-5 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL Project Area Master Plan Estimated Expenditures: ssoO,OOO During the next 24 to 30 months, the Commission will undertake a comprehensive master planning effort to establish a consolidated implementation strategy for the entire Project Area. Since the Project Area will be only generating a limited level of resources in the initial years of the Plan, the master planning activity will provide a unique opportunity to organize and incorporate property owner input in the redevelopment program before projects are actually implemented. In this vein, the Commission will fund various planning and design studies, market analyses, seek property owner, resident and community input, and either establish or recommend that the City establish programs that implement the identified improvements. Commission Goals and Objectives to be Achieved Undertaking this program will enable the Commission to adopt a comprehensive design and vision for the redevelopment program, thereby advancing the community’s efforts towards eliminating blight and achieving the Commission’s goals set forth in the Redevelopment Plan. Completion of this program will achieve the following Commission goals and objectives: Eliminating blight and environmental deficiencies in the Project Area. Assembling of land into parcels suitable for modern, integrated development with improved pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the Project Area. Replanning, redesigning, and developing properties which are stagnant or improperly utilized. Developing new beach and coastal recreational opportunities. Facilitating the redevelopment of the Encina power generating facility to a physically smaller, more efficient power generating Plant. Funding the Carlsbad Boulevard realignment which will yield excess property that could facilitate expansion of the Carlsbad State Beach campgrounds and other recreational facilities, and/or development of cultural facilities or other public facilities Enhancing commercial and recreational functions in the Project Area. Strengthening the economic base of the Project Area and the community by the installation of needed on- and off-site improvements to stimulate new commercial/industriaI expansion, employment, and economic growth. Increasing parking and open spaces amenities. Implementing performance criteria to assure quality site design environmental standards to provide unity and integrity to the entire Project Area development. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - C-6 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL Blighting Conditions Alleviated or Removed by Program This program will begin to address the following conditions of blight identified in the Project Area: 0 Unsafe/Unhealthy BuildingdFacilities Factors Hindering Viable Use Incompatible Uses Depreciated Values/lmpaired Investments 0 Inadequate Public Improvements Public Inhastructure and Facility Rogram Estimated Expenditures: $1.5 million Following completion of the Master Planning effort, the Commission anticipates undertaking various public infrastructure projects that address existing deficiencies, which may include the Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment and improved access to and from the Ponto area, and improvements to the Ponto sewage system. Commission Goals and Objectives to be Achieved This program will construct public improvements that address substandard and inadequate public infrastructure. Improvements to Project Area infrastmcture will - achieve certain goals and alleviate blighting conditions in the Project Area. This program will achieve the following goals and objectives: Eliminating blight and environmental deficiencies in the Project Area. Assembling of land into parcels suitable for modern, integrated development with improved pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the Project Area. Developing new beach and coastal recreational opportunities. Funding the Carlsbad Boulevard realignment which will yield excess property that could facilitate expansion of the Carlsbad State Beach campgrounds and other recreational facilities, and/or development of cultural facilities or other public facilities. Enhancing commercial and recreational functions in the Project Area. Strengthening the economic base of the Project Area and the community by the installation of needed on- and off-site improvements to stimulate new commercial/industriaI expansion, employment, and economic growth. Increasing parking and open spaces amenities. 0 0 0 0 0 Blighting Conditions Alleviated or Removed by Program This program will address the following conditions of blight identified in the Project Area: ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - C-7 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 0 Factors Hindering Viable Use 0 Depreciated Valuedlmpaired Investments 0 Inadequate Public Improvements Affordable Housing Program Estimated Expenditures: $750,000 During the first five years of the Plan, the Commission proposes to invest Project Housing Funds into existing Citywide housing programs. On May 16, 2000, the City Council and Commission adopted resolutions finding that such housing funds may be used outside the Project Area. Among the potential housing programs that may be funded include the following: 0 0 0 First-time homebuyer programs New construction of affordable dwelling units Acquisition and rehabilitation of existing units Commission Goals and Objectives to be Achieved Affordable housing is an important component of the Commissions implementation strategy during the first five years of the Plan. By investing Project resources into existing Commission and City affordable housing endeavors, the Commission will be able to more efficiently achieve the goals and objectives: Increasing, improving, and preserving the community’s supply of housing affordable to very low, low, and moderate income households. Blighting Conditions Alleviated or Removed by Program Since funds are anticipated to be used primarily outside the Project Area, this program will not be eliminating blighting conditions. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - C-8 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT The provisions of Section 33413(b)(4) of the Redevelopment Law require the Commission to adopt and periodically update a plan to ensure compliance with the existing criteria of Sedion 33413 of the Redevelopment Law regarding the affordability mix of new or rehabilitated housing units (“Housing Compliance Plan”). The Redevelopment Law further requires that this Housing Compliance Plan be prepared as part of the implementation plan required by Section 33490 of the Redevelopment Law. This Housing Compliance Plan must be consistent with the jurisdiction’s housing element and must also be reviewed and, if necessary, amended at least every five (5) years with either the housing element cycle or the implementation plan cycle. The following narrative addresses the following requirements pursuant to Section 33490(a)(2) (A) and (B) of the Redevelopment Law: 1. 2. 3. The amount of tax increment revenue that will be deposited in the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund during each of the next five years. Table C-I indicates the annual projected housing fund revenues over the next five years. The projected deposits to the Housing Fund during the next five years will total approximately $765,000. Estimates of the number of new, rehabilitated, or price-restricted units to be assisted during each of the five years and estimates of the expenditures of moneys from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund during each of the five years. The Commission has not yet identied or solicited property owner interest in affordable housing programs; as such, the Commission cannot accurately estimate the number of units that will be assisted in each of the coming five years. At this time, the Commission does not have any housing production obligations for this Project. There is no new housing construction or substantial rehabilitation occurring in the Project Area at this time. Thus, the Commission anticipates expending all of the Housing Fund monies during the coming five years on programs that either result in construction or rehabilitation of affordable housing units outside the Project Area throughout the City. Table C-I presents a forecast of the annual deposits to the Housing Fund between 2000-01 and 2004-05. During the first five years of the Plan, the Commission estimates that approximately $765,000 cumulatively will be expended on these programs. An estimate of the number of new, substantially rehabilitated or price- restricted residential units to be developed or purchased within the Project Area, both over the life of the Redevelopment Plan and during the next ten years. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - C-9 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 4. 5. 6. 7. No units are anticipated to be developed, rehabilitated, or price restricted during the next ten years, since the Commission is not aware of any housing proposals in the Project Area. Over the 30 year duration of the Redevelopment Plan, no units in the Project Area are anticipated to be substantially rehabilitated. Under the current General Plan, the Project Area could theoretically contain between 84 to 158 dwelling units, assuming the entire Ponto area is reused for residential use at permitted densities. An estimate of the number of units of very low, low- and moderate-income households required to be developed within the Project Area in order to meet the requirements of Section 3341 3(b)(2) of the Redevelopment Law, both over the life of the Redevelopment Plan and during the next ten years. Assuming the Ponto area is reused entirely for residential use, a minimum of 15% of the units developed would need to be affordable (between 13 and 24 units) Of these affordable units, at least 5 to 9 units (40%) would need to be reserved for very low income households, pursuant to Section 3341 3(b)(2) of the Redevelopment Law. Although the Commission does not anticipate that these units will be developed within the next ten years, it is theoretically possible that these units could be created during the 30 year duration of the Redevelopment Plan. The number of units of very low, low-, and moderate-income households which have been developed within the Project Area which meet the requirements of Section 3341 3(b)(2) of the Redevelopment Law. Because the proposed Plan is in the process of being adopted and the Project Area has not yet officially been created, this requirement does not apply. An estimate of the number of Commissiondeveloped residential units which will be developed during the next five years, if any, which will be governed by Section 33413(b)(l). The Commission does not anticipate developing or substantially rehabilitating any residential units itself during the next five years. An estimate of the number of Commissiondeveloped units for very low, low-, and moderate-income households which will be developed by the Commission during the next five years to meet the requirements of Section 33413(b)(l) of the Redevelopment Law. The Commission does not anticipate developing any residential units during the next five years. Therefore, the requirements of this section do not apply at this time. The following discussion contains the required components pursuant to Section 33490(a)(3) of the Redevelopment Law: ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - GI0 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Pursuant to Section 33490(a)(3) of the Redevelopment Law, if the Implementation Plan contains a project that will result in the destruction or removal of dwelling units that will have to be replaced pursuant to Section 3341 3(a) of the Redevelopment Law, the Implementation Plan shall identify proposed locations suitable for those replacement dwelling units. The requirements of this section do not apply to this Implementation Plan because the Commission does not currently propose any projects that will result in the destruction or removal of dwelling units. However, in the event that this occurs, the Commission will provide replacement dwelling units in compliance with the requirements of Section 3341 3(a) of the Redevelopment Law. Means to Accomplish Requirements The Commission intends to use revenue in the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund and any other appropriate funds available to the Commission under the Plan, including, but not limited to, the Department of Housing and Urban Development funds and Community Development Block Grants, and rental subsidies through the Section 8 program. Where available, low income housing tax credits and tax exempt financing mechanisms may also be used by the Commission. Policies and programs such as providing affordable housing incentives for developers, permitting manufactured housing, and inclusionary housing programs will be explored by the Commission. The Commission may also provide rehabilitation loans and grants. Housing Element Compliance This Housing Compliance Plan, like the Housing Element in the City’s General Plan, focuses on providing suitable housing for City residents including lower income households and has been prepared according to guidelines established in the programs and goals outlined in the Housing Element of the General Plan. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. JUNE 20,2000 CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY OF COUNCIL - C-I 1 - An Explanation of Why the Elimination of Blight Cannot be Accomplished by Private Enterprise Acting Alone or Through Other Financing Alternatives Other Than Tax Increment Financing As described in Section B of this Report, the Commission cannot rely on private enterprise acting alone to eliminate blight because the private sector -is constrained by numerous factors that inhibit investment. For Cabrillo Power, owner of Encina Power Plant, these factors include the reliance on an obsolete and inefficient Plant, that generates more pollution and requires more energy to operate than modern facilities today. The City’s utility consultant estimates that Cabrillo Power may be facing operating losses over $700 million over the next 20 years, assuming the price of power keeps pace with inflation. As a result of these operating revenue shortfalls, no funds are generated by the facility to fund major capital expenditures, such as development of a new replacement facility, or even the short-term installation of SCR technology to reduce emissions. Redevelopment can help address these conditions and issues by creating a partnership with Cabrillo Power and the Commission to facilitate the installation of improvements to reduce harmful emissions, with the long term goal of reconstructing a more efficient and physically smaller, cleaner burning power plant. For Ponto area property owners, several factors inhibit investment in the Project Area. These factors include mixed ownership patterns, existence of several incompatible and nonconforming industrial uses in this residentially zoned area, and the probability of hazardous contamination from auto wrecking and other industrial uses, including both the current and prior uses. These nonconforming uses in the Ponto area proliferate because there are no opportunities to locate these businesses elsewhere in the City and it is an affordable location. As a result, property owners of nonconforming uses have little incentive to redevelop their properties as long as the businesses function. For the few residential uses in the area, their fate remains in limbo because they adjoin these nonconforming and incompatible uses. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - E-1 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Due to the lack of available private and public resources for redevelopment, the Commission will primarily rely on tax increment revenue to finance Project Area improvements. As discussed in Section B of this Report, Cabrillo Power has indicated that they do not have the resources to construct a new replacement Power Plant for at least the next 12 years, and probably much longer depending on the market price for power in the region. If the price of power does not escalate per Cabrillo Power's forecasts, the amount of capital funding could be reduced, and these improvements could be further delayed. Property owners in the Ponto area face different financial constraints. Due to the area's mixed character and preponderance of undersized lots under multiple ownership, Ponto area property owners do not have a financial incentive for redeveloping their properties. Given the substandard condition of the area, there is no realistic expectation that Ponto property values can support the substantial reinvestment needed without infusion of additional capital from outside the area. Finally, the City itself cannot undeMnite the $205 million of redevelopment and housing needs in the Project Area. Currently, the City does not have funding in its capital improvement program to meet the proposed infrastructure projects for the Project Area, including the potential realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard. Increasing resources within this area through a special assessment district would only further burden property owners, residents and businesses with improvements that they currently are unable to afford. Consequently, tax increment revenue will be an essential funding source for redevelopment activities. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDWELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - E-2 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Method of Financing and Economic Feasibility of the Plan Redevelopment of the Project Area is proposed to be financed with the following resources: I) Financial assistance from the City, County, State of California and/or Federal Government; 2) Tax increment revenue; 3) Bonded debt; 4) Proceeds from lease or sale of Commission-owned property; 5) Loans from private financial institutions; and 6) Any other legally available source. - The more typical sources of redevelopment financing that may be employed with the Project are described below. Financial Assistance from the City, County, State, amilor the Federal Government The Commission may obtain loans and advances from the City for planning, construction, and operating capital for administration of the Project until such time that sufficient tax increment revenue is raised to repay loans and provide other means of operating capital. The City may also defer payments on Commission loans for land purchases, benefiting the Commission's cash flow. Such assistance is anticipated to be employed to meet short-term cash flow needs, as the City's General Fund cannot cany extensive levels of Commission debt at the risk of threatening the City's own cash balances. As available, other funds such as state gas tax funds and federal Community Development Block Grants will be appropriately used to pay the costs of Project implementation. The Commission and City will also pursue other available grants and loans; additionally, the City or other public agencies may issue bonds on behalf of the Commission and provide in-kind assistance. The Commission may use property tax increment as provided for in Section 33670 of the Redevelopment Law, and is authorized in the Plan to employ tax ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO COUNCIL MAY 22,2000 - E-1 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT increment financing to underwrite Project costs. Tax increment revenue may only be used to pay indebtedness incurred by the Commission; indebtedness includes principal and interest on loans, monies advanced, or debts (whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise) incurred by the Commission to finance or refinance, in whole or in part, redevelopment activities. Project tax increment revenues are distributed to address an array of obligations. As required by Section 33334.6 of the Redevelopment Law, twenty percent (20%) of Project tax increment revenue is deposited into the Housing Fund for the purposes of increasing, improving, and preserving the community's supply of low and moderate income housing. The remaining 80% of the tax increment revenue will be used to pay for taxing entity obligations, debt service costs, and other program expenditures. Program expenditures include infrastructure, capital facility, and economic development programs within the Project Area. The Plan would feature specific time limits on the collection of tax increment revenue as required by Redevelopment Law. As stated in the Plan, the Commission may collect tax increment revenue for a period of 45 years following adoption of the ordinance adopting the Plan. Assuming the Plan is adopted during fiscal year 199940, the Commission would receive Project Area tax increment revenue through fiscal year 2044-45. BotldedDebt Under the Plan, the Commission would have a capacity to issue bonds and/or notes for any of its corporate purposes, payable in whole or in part from tax increment revenue. Many redevelopment agencies in the state employ bond financing as an integral component of their overall redevelopment-financing program. - The Plan permits the Commission the ability to incur debt during the first 20 years of the Plan, and establishes a $100 million cumulative limit on the amount of bonded debt principal which may be outstanding at any one time. LeaseorSaleofComm'rssion-OwnedProperty The Commission may sell, lease, or otherwise encumber its property holdings to pay the costs of Project implementation. Participation in Development If the Commission enters into agreements with property owners, tenants, and/or other developers that provide for revenues to be paid or repaid to the Commission, such revenues may be used to pay Project implementation costs. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - E-2 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL Other Available Sources Any other loans, grants, or financial assistance from the federal government, or any other public or private source will be utilized, as available and appropriate. The Commission will also consider use of the powers provided by Chapter 8 (Redevelopment Construction Loans) of the Redevelopment Law to provide construction funds for appropriate projects. Where feasible and appropriate, the Commission may use assessment district andor Mello-Roos bond financing to pay for the costs of public infrastructure, facilities, and operations. -- -- - -*- -* . The primary source of project financing is anticipated to be tax increment revenue. Table E-1 presents preliminary forecast of Project tax increment revenues, based on several assumptions noted below: 1999-00 Base Year Value: Assuming the Plan is adopted prior to July 20, 2000, the Project will collect tax increment revenues from increases in the Project Area assessed value over fiscal year 199940. In January 2000, the County Auditor-Controller delivered a report of the estimated base year value of the Project Area. The County’s base year report estimated the total Project Area’s base year value is $305,431,594. Assessed Value Growth Rates: RSG conservatively applied a 2% annual growth rate to forecast future assessed value increases in Mure years. In addition, as noted below, the projections incorporate specific development assumptions that further increase the Project Area’s projected tax increment revenues. Development Assumptions: RSG incorporated various development assumptions into the revenue forecast. Since specific development proposals are not in place at this time, actual project scope and timing may vary significantly from what is included in this forecast. The specific projects included in the development assumptions are noted below: Encina Power Plant improvements: The development assumptions assume that the sale of the Encina Plant in 1999 will increase its assessed value by approximately $25 million (from is current estimated value of $275 million to $300 million); this sale is assumed to be reflected on the 2000-01 assessment roll. In addition, RSG has assumed that $20 million of interim improvements to reduce catalytic emissions would be completed and applied to the 2002-03 assessment roll. Finally, the assumptions anticipate the full decommissioning and reconstruction of a physically smaller, more efficient 2.3 billion kilowatt facility east of the Encina facility. It has been assumed that this facility, which would ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - E-3 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT increase the Plant's assessed value to $550 million (or by $230 million), will be completed and applied to the assessment roll beginning in fiscal year 201 3-14. Other development assumptions: RSG also estimated the potential increases in assessed value that could be experienced upon the potential redevelopment of vacant and underutilized parcels within the Project Area. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - E4 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PROJECTED TAX INCREMENT REVENUES SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~ Fiscal Year Secure Local Potential New Incremental Gross Statutory Housing Redevelopment Cumulative Growth Assessed Value Value Tax Tax. Ag. Fund Fund (Net) Net Redev. Rate Value Increment Payments Fund BY 1999-00 1 2000-01 2 2001-02 3 2002-03 4 2003-04 5 2004-05 6 2005-06 7 2006-07 8 2007-08 9 2008-09 10 2009-10 11 2010-11 12 2011-12 13 2012-13 14 2013-14 15 2014-15 16 2015-16 17 2016-17 18 2017-18 19 2018-19 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 305,431,594 31 1,540,226 343,271,030 359.41 8,451 397,920,820 405,879,236 419,402,821 427,790,878 470,006,695 479,406,829 538,362,966 549,130,225 560,112,829 57 I ,315,086 582,741,388 879,078,215 896,659,780 914,592,975 932,884,835 951,542,532 25,000,000 9,100,000 30,700,000 5,300,000 33,000,000 48,400,000 279,100,000 46,939,436 84,686,857 92,489,226 105,747,642 11 3,971,227 155,359,284 164,575,101 222,375,235 232,931,372 243,698,631 254,681,235 265,883,492 556,409,794 573,646,621 591,228,186 609,161,381 627,453,241 646,110,938 469,394 846,869 924,892 1,057,476 1,139,712 1,553,593 1,645,751 2,223,752 2,329,314 2,436,986 2,546,812 2,658,835 5,564,098 5,736,466 5,912,282 6,091,614 6,274,532 6,461,109 93,879 169,374 184,978 21 1,495 227,942 310,719 329,150 444,750 465,863 487,397 527,813 569,038 1,638,174 1,701,606 1,766,306 1,832,300 1,899,614 1,968,275 20 2019-20 2.0% 970,573,382 665,141,788 6,651,418 2,038,308 21 2020-21 22 2021-22 2022-23 24 2023-24 25 2024-25 26 2025-26 27 2026-27 28 2027-28 29 2028-29 30 2029-30 31 2030-31 32 2031-32 33 2032-33 34 2033-34 35 2034-35 36 2035-36 37 2036-37 38 2037-38 39 2038-39 40 2039-40 41 2040-41 42 2041-42 43 2042-43 44 2043-44 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 989,984,850 1,009,784,547 1,029,980,238 1,050,579,843 1,071,591,439 1,093,023,268 1,114,883,734 1,137,181,408 1 ,I 59,925,036 1 ,I 83,123,537 1,206,786,008 1,230,921,728 1,255,540,163 1,280,650,966 1,306,263,985 1,332,389,265 1,359,037,050 1,386,217,791 1,413,942,147 1,442,220,990 1,471,065,410 1,500,486,718 1,530,496,452 1.56 1.106.381 684,553,256 704,352,953 724,548,644 745,148,249 766,159,845 787,591,674 809,452,140 831,749,814 854,493,442 877,691,943 901,354.414 925,490,134 950,108.569 975,219,372 1,000,832,391 1,026,957,671 1,053,605,456 1,080,786.197 1,108,510,553 1,136,789,396 1,165,633,816 1,195,055,124 1,225,064,858 1.255.674.787 6,845,533 7,043,530 7,245,486 7,451,482 7,661,598 7,875,917 8,094,521 8,317,498 8,544,934 8,776,919 9,013,544 9,254,901 9,501,086 9,752,194 10,008,324 10,269,577 10,536,055 10,807,862 11,085,106 11,367,894 11,656,338 11,950,551 12,250,649 12.556.748 2,109,742 2,182,605 2,256,925 2,332,732 2,410,055 2,488,924 2,569,370 2,651,426 2,735,122 2,820,493 2,907,571 3,023,422 3,141,590 3,262,122 3,385,065 3,510,466 3,638,376 3,768,843 3,901,920 4,037,658 4,176,112 4,317,334 4,461,381 4,608,308 93,879 169,374 184,978 21 1,495 227,942 310,719 329,150 444,750 465,863 487,397 509,362 531,767 1 ,I 12,820 1,147,293 1,182,456 1,218,323 1,254,906 1,292,222 281,637 508,121 554,935 634,486 683,827 932,156 987,451 1,334,251 1,397,588 1,462,192 1,509,637 1,558,030 2,813,104 2,887,567 2,963,519 3,040,99 1 3,120,012 3,200,613 281,637 789,758 1,344,693 1,979,179 2,663,006 3,595,162 4,582,613 5,916,864 7,314,452 8,776,644 10,286,281 11,844,311 14,657,415 1 7,544,982 20,508,502 23,549,493 26,669,504 29,870,117 3,282,826 33,152,943 1,330,284 1,369,107 1,408,706 1,449,097 1,490,296 1,532,320 1,575,183 1,618,904 1,663,500 1,708,987 1,755,384 1,802,709 1,850,980 1,900,217 1,950,439 2,001,665 2,053,915 2,107,211 2,161,572 2,217,021 2,273,579 2,331,268 2,390,110 2,450,130 2,511,350 3,366,684 3,452,218 3,539,464 3,628,454 3,719,224 3,811,810 3,906,247 4,002,573 4,100,825 4,201,043 4,303,265 4,380,499 4,459,278 4,539,633 4,621,594 4,705,195 4,790,468 4,877,446 4,966,164 5,056,657 5,148,959 5,243,107 5,339,138 5,437,090 36,519,627 39,971,846 43,511,309 47,139,764 50,858,988 54,670,798 58,577,045 62,579,617 66,680,443 70,881,486 75,184,750 79,565,250 84,024,528 88,564,160 93,185,755 97,890,950 102,681,418 107,558,864 112,525,029 117,581,685 122,730,644 127,973,751 133,312,889 138,749,979 I/ Accounts for only the 2% Proposition 13 inflationary increase. 2/ 1999-00 base year value provided by County Auditor Controller PROJECTED TAX INCREMENT REVENUES SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Fiscal Year Secure Local Potential New Incremental Gross Statutory Housing Redevelopment Cumulative Growth Assessed Value Value Tax Tax. Ag. Fund Fund (Net) Net Redev. Rate Value Increment Payments Fund BY 1 2 3 4 5 6 .’ 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2 0 0 8 - 0 9 2009-1 0 2010-1 1 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 201 5-1 6 201 6-1 7 2017-1 8 201 8-1 9 20 2019-20 21 2020-21 22 2021-22 2022-23 24 2023-24 25 2024-25 26 2025-26 27 2026-27 28 2027-28 29 2028-29 30 2029-30 31 2030-31 32 2031-32 33 2032-33 34 2033-34 35 2034-35 36 2035-36 37 2036-37 38 2037-38 39 2038-39 40 2039-40 41 2040-41 42 2041-42 43 2042-43 44 2043-44 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 2.0% 305,431,594 31 1,540,226 343,271,030 359,4 1 8,45 1 397,920,820 405,879,236 419,402,821 427,790,878 470,006,695 479,406,829 538,362,966 549,130,225 560,112,829 571,315,086 582,741,388 879,078,215 896,659,780 91 4,592,975 932,884,835 951,542,532 970,573,382 989,984,850 1,009,784,547 1,029,980,238 1,050,579,843 1,071,591,439 1,093,023,268 1,114,883,734 1,137,181,408 1,159,925,036 1 ,183,123,537 1,206,786,008 1,230,921,728 1,255,540,163 1,280,650,966 1,306,263,985 1,332,389,265 1,359,037,050 1,386,217,791 1,413,942,147 1,442,220,990 1,471,065,410 1,500,486,718 1,530,496,452 1,561,106,381 25,000,000 9,100,000 30,700,000 5,300,000 33,000,000 48,400,000 279,100,000 46,939,436 84,686,857 92,489,226 105,747,642 113,971,227 155,359,284 164,575,101 222,375,235 232,931,372 243,698,631 254,681,235 265,883,492 556,409,794 573,646,621 591,228,186 609,161,381 627,453,24 1 646.1 10,938 665,141,788 684,553,256 704,352,953 724,548,644 745,148,249 766,159,845 787,591,674 809,452,140 831,749,814 854,493,442 877,691,943 901,354,414 925,490,134 950,108,569 975,219,372 1,000,832,391 1,026,957,671 1,053,605,456 1,080,786,197 1,108,510,553 1,136,789,396 1,165,633,816 1,195,055,124 1,225,064,858 1,255,674,787 469,394 846,869 924,892 1,057,476 1,139,712 1,553,593 1,645,751 2,223,752 2,329,314 2,436,986 2,546,812 2,658,835 5,564,098 5,736,466 591 2,282 6,091,614 6,274,532 6,461,109 93,879 169,374 184,978 21 1,495 227,942 310,719 329,150 444,750 465,863 487,397 527,813 569,038 1,638,174 1,701,606 1,766,306 1,832,300 1,899,614 1,968,275 93,879 169,374 184,978 21 1,495 227,942 310,719 329,150 444,750 465,863 487,397 509,362 531,767 1 ,I 12,820 1,147,293 1,182,456 1,218,323 1,254,906 1,292,222 281,637 508,121 554,935 634,486 683,827 932,156 987,451 1,334,251 1,397,588 1,462,192 1,509,637 1,558,030 2,813,104 2,887,567 2,963,519 3,040;991 3,120,012 3,200,613 281,637 789,758 1,344,693 1,979.1 79 2,663,006 3,595,162 4,582,613 5,9 1 6,864 7,314,452 8,776,644 10,286,281 11,844,311 14,657,415 17,544,982 20,508,502 23,549,493 26,669,504 29,870,117 6,651,418 2,038,308 1,330,284 3,282,826 33,152,943 6,845,533 7,043,530 7,245,486 7,451,482 7,661,598 7,875,917 8,094,521 8,317,498 8,544,934 8,776,919 9,O 1 3,544 9,254,901 9,501,086 9,752,194 10,008,324 10,269,577 IO, 536,055 10,807,862 1 1,085,106 11,367,894 1 1,656,338 11,950,551 12,250,649 12,556,748 2,109,742 2,182,605 2,256,925 2,332,732 2,410,055 2,488,924 2,569,370 2,651,426 2,735,122 2,820,493 2,907,571 3,023,422 3,141,590 3,262,122 3,385,065 3,510,466 3,638,376 3,768,843 3,901,920 4,037,658 4,176,112 4,317,334 4,461,381 4,608,308 1,369,107 1,408,706 1,449,097 1,490,296 1,532,320 1,575,183 1,618,904 1,663,500 1,708,987 1,755,384 1,802,709 1,850,980 1,900,217 1,950,439 2,001,665 2,053,915 2,107,211 2,161,572 2,217,021 2,273,579 2,331,268 2,390,110 2,450,130 2,511,350 3,366,684 3,452,218 3,539,464 3,628,454 3,719,224 3,811,810 3,906,247 4,002,573 4,100,825 4,201,043 4,303,265 4,380,499 4,459,278 4,539,633 4,621,594 4,705,195 4,790,468 4,877,446 4,966,164 5,056,657 5,148,959 5,243,107 5,339,138 5,437.090 36,519,627 39,971,846 43,511,309 47,139,764 50,858,988 54,670,798 58,577,045 62,579,617 66,680,443 70,881,486 75,184,750 79,565,250 84,024,528 88,564,160 93,185,755 97,890,950 102,681,418 107,558,864 112,525,029 117,581,685 122,730,644 127,973,751 133,312,889 138.749.979 11 Accounts for only the 2% Proposition 13 inflationary increase. 21 1999-00 base year value provided by County Auditor Controller Over the 45-year period within which the Commission may collect tax increment revenue, RSG’s estimates that approximately $303 million of gross tax increment revenue could be generated by the Project Area. Of this amount, 20%, or $61 million, would be deposited into the Commission’s Housing Fund, and the remaining 80%, or $242 million, would be available to the Nonhousing Fund. The Commission would be required to share a portion (projected to be approximately $98 million) of its Nonhousing Fund revenues with the affected taxing agencies pursuant to Section 33607.5 of the Redevelopment Law (“Statutory Payments”). These Statutory Payments would start in the first fiscal year the Commission would receive tax increment revenue from the Project Area (assumed to be fiscal year 2001-02). According to Section 33607.5 of the Law, beginning in the payment first year, the Statutory Payments are equal to 25% of the Project‘s annual nonhousing tax increment revenue in excess of amounts received in the prior year. These Statutory Payments are subject to two subsequent increases. The first increase in Statutory Payments would take effect in the payment eleventh year, when the Commission would be required to pay 21% of the incremental increase in nonhousing tax increment revenues exceeding amounts in the tenth payment year. The Law further provides for a second increase in the Statutory Payments that commences in the thirty-first payment year of 14% of the incremental increase in nonhousing tax increment revenues in excess of the thirtieth year. In total, the Commission will share approximately 32% of its Nonhousing Fund revenues with the affected taxing agencies. The actual amount of the Statutory Payments will vary based on the amount of - tax increment revenues collected by the Commission each year. A forecast of Statutory Payments has been included on Table E-I. Should actual tax increment revenues exceed or fall below these projections, actual Statutory Payments would be higher or lower. Each taxing agency is entitled to their respective share of the Statutory Payment. All agencies receive their share of the Statutory Payments, except for the City of Carlsbad, which, by Section 33607.5, is only entitled to its share of the first 25% of the Statutory Payments. The following is a list of affected taxing agencies in the Project Area, according to the County’s January 2000 base year report: San Diego County General Fund Greater San Diego County Resource Conservation Carlsbad Unified Schools Mira Costa Community College, currently a basic-aid district that is entitled to both their share of the Statutory Payments, plus additional revenues provided under Section 33676(b) of the Redeployment Law. County Schools ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - E-6 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CIN COUNCIL 6) City of Carlsbad 7) Tri-City Hospital 8) Leucadia County Water District 9) Municipal Water District IO) County Water Authority Section E of this Report includes a preliminary list of potential infrastructure/public facility projects in the Plan and other potential programs proposed by the Commission. The total estimated cost of these projects and programs is approximately $205 million, including direct project costs and financing costs. RSG projects that the Commission will have approximately $205 million of housing ($61 million) and nonhousing ($144 million) tax increment revenues available to fund these activities. Should tax increment revenues fall below or exceed projections, the Commission will alter implementation activities accordingly. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION JUNE 20.2000 - E-7 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL The Method of Relocation In conjunction with the adoption of the Plan, the Commission prepared and circulated Relocation Guidelines, consisting of the State Relocation Law (Government Code 7260 through 7277), and the California Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Guidelines as established in the California Code of Regulation, Title 25, Chapter 6 (“State Guidelines”). (Copies of the State Relocation Law and State Guidelines, in effect as of this date, follow this page.) The Commission does not anticipate that implementation of the Project will result in the relocation of businesses, residents, or local community institutions. If relocation is necessary, the Relocation Guidelines ensure that the Commission will meet its relocation responsibilities to any families, persons, or nonprofit local community institutions to be temporarily or permanently displaced as .a consequence of the Plan’s implementation. No persons or families of low and moderate income shall be displaced unless and until there is a suitable housing unit available and ready for occupancy by the displaced person or family at rents comparable to those at the time of their displacements. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CIlY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - F-I - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT State Relocation Law (Government Code 7260 through 7277) ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDWELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - F-2 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Government Code. Sections 7260-7277 Chapter 16. Relocation Assistance 7260. As used in this chapter: (a) "Public entity" includes the state, the Regents of the University of California, a county, city, city and county, district, public authority, public agency, and any other political subdivision or public corporation in the state or any entity acting on behalf of these agencies when acquiring real property, or any interest therein, in any city or county for public use and any person who has the authority to acquire property by eminent domain under state law. (b) "Person" means any individual, parmership, corporation, limited liability company, or association. (c) (1) "Displaced person" means both of the following: (A) Any person who moves from real property, or who moves his or her personal property from real property, either: (i) As a direct result of a written notice of intent to acquire, or the acquisition of, the real property, in whole or in part, for a program or project undertaken by a public entity or by any person having an agreement with, or acting on behalf of, a public entity. (ii) As a direct result of the rehabilitation, demolition, or other displacing activity, as the public entity may prescribe under a program or project undertaken by a public entity, of real property on which the person is a residential tenant or conducts a business or farm operation, if the public entity determines that the displacement is permanent. For purposes of this subparagraph, "residential tenant" includes any occupant of a residential hotel unit, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 50669 of the Health and Safety Code, and any occupant of employee housing, as defined in Section 17008 of the Health and Safety Code, but does not include any person who has been determined to be in unlawful occupancy of the displacement dwelling. (B) Solely for the purposes of Sections 7261 and 7262, any person who moves from real property, or moves his or her personal property from real property, either: (i) As a direct result of a written notice of intent to acquire, or the acquisition of, other real property, in whole or in part, on which the person conducts a business or farm operation for a program or project undertaken by a public entity. (ii) As a direct result of the rehabilitation, demolition, or other displacing activity as the public entity may prescribe under a program or project undertaken by a public entity, of other real property on which the person conducts a business or farm operation, in any case in which the public entity determines that the displacement is permanent. (2) This subdivision shall be construed so that persons displaced as a result of Page 1 of 19 public action receive relocation benefits in cases where they are displaced as a result of an owner participation agreement or an acquisition carried out by a private person for, or in connection with, a public use where the public entity is otherwise empowered to acquire the property to carry out the public use. Except for persons or families of low and moderate income, as defined in Section 50093* of the Health and Safety Code, who are occupants of housing that was made available to them on a permanent basis by a public agency and who are required to move from the housing, a "displaced person" shall not include any of the following: (A) Any person who has been determined to be in unlawful occupancy of the displacement dwellings. (B) Any person whose right of possession at the time of moving arose after the date of the public entity's acquisition of the real property. (C) Any person who has occupied the real property for the purpose of obtaining assistance under this chapter. (D) In any case in which the public entity acquires property for a program or project (other than a person who was an occupant of the property at the time it was acquired), any person who occupies the property for a period subject to termination when the property is needed for the program or project. (d) !Business'' means any lawful activity, except a farm operation, conducted for any of the following: (1) Primarily for the purchase, sale, lease, or rental of personal and real property, and for the manufacture, processing, or marketing of products, commodities, or any other personal property. (2) Primarily for the sale of services to the public. (3) Primarily by a nonprofit organization. (4) Solely for the purpose of Section 7262 for assisting in the purchase, sale, resale, manufacture, processing, or marketing of products, commodities, personal property, or services by the erection and maintenance of an outdoor advertising display, whether or not the display is located on the premises on which any of the above activities are conducted. (e) "Farm operation" means any activity conducted solely or primarily for the production of one or more agricultural products or commodities, including timber, for sale or home use, and customarily producing these products or commodities in sufficient quantity to be capable of contributing materially to the operator's support. (f) "Affected property" means any real property that actually declines in fair market value Page2of 19 because of acquisition by a public entity for public use of other real property and a change in the use of the real property acquired by the public entity. (g) "Public use" means a use for which real property may be acquired by eminent domain. (h) "Mortgage" means classes of liens that are commonly given to secure advances on, or the unpaid purchase price of, real property, together with the credit instruments, if any, secured thereby. (i) "Comparable replacement dwelling" means any dwelling that is all of the following: (1) Decent, safe, and sanitary. (2) Adequate in size to accommodate the occupants. (3) In the case of a displaced person who is a renter, within the financial means of the displaced person. A comparable replacement dwelling is within the financial means of a displaced person if the monthly rental cost of the dwelling, including estimated average monthly utility costs, minus any replacement housing payment available to the person, does not exceed 30 percent of the person's average monthly income, unless the displaced person meets one or more of the following conditions, in which case the payment of the monthly rental cost of the comparable replacement dwelling, including estimated average monthly utility costs, minus any replacement housing payment available to the person, shall not exceed 25 percent of the person's average monthly income: (A) Prior to January 1, 1998, the displaced person received a notice to vacate from a public entity, or from a person having an agreement with a public entity. (B) The displaced person resides on property that was acquired by a public entity, 'or by a person having an agreement with a public entity, prior to January 1, 1998. (C) Prior to January 1, 1998, a public entity, or a person having an agreement with a public entity, initiated negotiations to acquire the property on which the displaced person resides. (D) Prior to January 1, 1998, a public entity, or a person having an agreement with a public entity, entered into an agreement to acquire the property on which the displaced person resides. (E) Prior to January 1, 1998, a public entity, or a person having an agreement with a public entity, gave written notice of intent to acquire the property on which the displaced person resides. (F) The displaced person is covered by, or resides in an area or project covered by, a final relocation plan that was adopted by the legislative body prior to January 1, Page 3 of 19 1998, pursuant to this chapter and the regulations adopted pursuant to this chapter. (G) The displaced person is covered by, or resides in an area or project covered by, a proposed relocation plan that was required to have been submitted prior to January 1, 1998, to the Department of Housing and Community Development or to a local relocation committee, or for which notice was required to have been provided to occupants of the property prior to January 1, 1998, pursuant to this chapter and the regulations adopted pursuant to this chapter . (H) The displaced person is covered by, or resides in an area or project covered by, a proposed relocation plan that was submitted prior to January 1, 1998, to the Department of Housing and Community Development or to a local relocation committee, or for which notice was provided to the public or to occupants of the property prior to January 1, 1998, pursuant to this chapter and the regulations adopted pursuant to this chapter, and the person is eventually displaced by the project covered in the proposed relocation plan. (I) The displaced person resides on property for which a contract for acquisition, rehabilitation, demolition, construction, or other displacing activity was entered into by a public entity, or by a person having an agreement with a public entity, prior to January 1998. (J) The displaced person resides on property where an owner participation agreement, or other agreement between a public entity and a private party that will result in the acquisition, rehabilitation, demolition, or development of the property or other displacement, was entered into prior to January 1, 1998, and the displaced person resides in the property at the time of the agreement, provides information to the public entity, or person having an agreement with the public entity showing that he or she did reside in the property at the time of the agreement and is eventually displaced by the project covered in the agreement. (4) Comparable with respect to the number of rooms, habitable space, and type and quality, of construction. Comparability under this paragraph shall not require strict adherence to a detailed, feature-by-feature comparison. While a comparable replacement dwelling need not possess every feature of the displacement dwelling, the principal features shall be present. (5) In an area not subject to unreasonable adverse environmental conditions. (6) In a location generally not less desirable than the location of the displaced persons dwelling with respect to public utilities, facilities, services, and the displaced person's place of employment. (j) "Displacing agency" means any public entity or person carrying out a program or project which causes a person to be a displaced person for a public project. (k) "Appraisal" means a written statement independently and impartially prepared by a qualified appraiser setting forth an opinion of defined value of an adequately described property as of a specific date, supported by the presentation and analysis of relevant market information. Page4of 19 (1) "Small business" means a business as defined in Part 24 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. (m) "Lead agency" means the Department of Housing and Community Development. 7260.5. (a) The Legislature finds and declares the following: (1) Displacement as a direct result of programs or projects undertaken by a public entity is caused by a number of activities, including rehabilitation, demolition, code enforcement, and acquisition. (2) Relocation assistance policies must provide for fair, uniform, and equitable treatment of all affected persons. (3) The displacement of businesses often results in their closure. (4) Minimizing the adverse impact of displacement is essential to maintaining the. economic and social well-being of communities. (5) Implementation of this chapter has resulted in burdensome, inefficient, and inconsistent compliance requirements and procedures which may be improved by establishing a lead agency. (b) This chapter establishes a uniform policy for the fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced as a direct result of programs or projects undertaken by a public entity. The primary purpose of this chapter is to ensure that these persons shall not suffer disproportionate injuries as a result of programs and projects designed for the benefit of the public as a whole and to minimize the hardship of displacement on these persons. (c) The Legislature intends all of the following: (1) Public entities shall carry out this chapter in a manner which minimizes waste, fraud, and mismanagement and reduces unnecessary administrative costs. (2) Uniform procedures for the administration of relocation assistance shall, to the maximum extent feasible, assure that the unique circumstances of any displaced person are taken into account and that persons in essentially similar circumstances are accorded equal treatment under this chapter. (3) The improvement of housing conditions of economically disadvantaged persons under this chapter shall be undertaken, to the maximum extent feasible, in coordination with existing federal, state, and local government programs for accomplishing these goals. (4) The policies and procedures of this chapter shall be administered in a manner which Page5of 19 is consistent with fair housing requirements and which assures all persons their rights under Title VI11 of that act of April 11, 1968 (Public Law 90-284), commonly known as the Civil Rights Act of 1968 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 7260.7. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in furtherance of the goal set forth in paragraph (3) of subdivision (c) of Section 7260.5, nonprofit facilities subsidized pursuant to any federal or state program for the benefit of low-income tenants that restrict rent increases based on operating cost increases, and that also receive state funds for renovation and rehabilitation involving the temporary relocation of those tenants, shall be exempt from any restrictions on rents imposed pursuant to this chapter. 7261. (a) Programs or projects undertaken by a public entity shall be planned in a manner that (1) recognizes, at an early stage in the planning of the programs or projects and before the commencement of any actions which will cause displacements, the problems associated with the displacement of individuals, families, businesses, and farm operations, and (2) provides for the resolution of these problems in order to minimize adverse impacts on displaced persons and to expedite program or project advancement and completion. The head of the displacing agency shall ensure the relocation assistance advisory services described in subdivision (c) are made available to all persons displaced by the public entity. If the agency determines that any person occupying property immediately adjacent to the property where the displacing activity occurs is caused substantial economic injury as a result thereof, the agency may make the advisory services available to the person. (b) In giving this assistance, the public entity may establish local relocation advisory assistance offices to assist in obtaining replacement facilities for persons, businesses, and farm operations which find that it is necessary to relocate because of the acquisition of real property by the public entity. (c) This advisory assistance shall include those measures, facilities, or services which are necessary or appropriate to do all of the following: (1) Determine and make timely recommendations on the needs and preferences, if any, of displaced persons for relocation assistance. (2) Provide current and continuing information on the availability, sales prices, and rentals of comparable replacement dwellings for displaced homeowners and tenants, and suitable locations for businesses and farm operations. (3) Assure that, within a reasonable time period prior to displacement, to the extent that it can be reasonably accomplished, there will be available in areas not generally less desirable in regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities, and at rents or prices within the financial means of displaced families and individuals, decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings, sufficient in number to meet the needs of, and available to, those displaced persons requiring those dwellings and reasonably accessible to their places of employment, except that, in the case of a federally funded project, a waiver may be obtained from the federal government. Page6of 19 (4) Assure that a person shall not be required to move from a dwelling unless the person has had a reasonable opportunity to relocate to a comparable replacement dwelling, except in the case of any of the following: (A) A major disaster as defined in Section 102(2) of the federal Disaster Relief Act of 1974. (B) A state of emergency declared by the President or Governor. (C) Any other emergency which requires the person to move immediately from the dwelling because continued occupancy of the dwelling by the person constitutes a substantial danger to the health or safety of the person. (5) Assist a person displaced from a business or farm operation in obtaining and becoming established in a suitable replacement location. (6) Supply information concerning other federal and state programs which may be of assistance to those persons in applying for assistance under the program. (7) Provide other advisory services to displaced persons in order to minimize hardships to those persons. (d) The head of the displacing agency shall coordinate its relocation assistance program with the project work necessitating the displacement and with other planned or proposed activities of other public entities in the community or nearby areas which may affect the implementation of its relocation assistance program. (e) Notwithstanding subdivision (c) of Section 7260, in any case in which a displacing agency'acquires property for a program or project, any person who occupies the property on a rental basis for a short term or a period subject to termination when the property is needed for the program or project, shall be eligible for advisory services to the extent determined by the displacing agency. 7261.5. In order to prevent unnecessary expenses and duplications of functions, and to promote uniform and effective administration of relocation assistance programs for displaced persons under this chapter, a public entity may enter into a contract with any individual, firm, association, or corporation for services in connection with such program, or may carry out its functions under this chapter through any federal, state, or local governmental agency having an established organization for conducting relocation assistance programs. Any public entity may, in carrying out its relocation assistance activities, utilize the services of state or local housing agencies or other agencies having experience in the administration or conduct of similar housing assistance activities. 7262. (a) Whenever a program or project to be undertaken by a public entity will result in Page7of 19 the displacement of any person, the displaced person is entitled to payment for actual moving and related expenses as the public entity determines to be reasonable and necessary, including expenses for all of the following: (1) Actual and reasonable expenses in moving himself or herself, his or her family, business, or farm operation, or his or her, or his or her family's, personal property. (2) Actual direct losses of tangible personal property as a result of moving or discontinuing a business or farm operation, but not to exceed an amount equal to the reasonable expenses that would have been required to relocate the property, as determined by the public entity. (3) Actual and reasonable expenses in searching for a replacement business or farm, not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000)- (4) Actual and reasonable expenses necessary to reestablish a displaced farm, nonprofit organization, or small business at its new site, but not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000). (b) Any displaced person eligible for payments under subdivision (a) who is displaced from a dwelling and who elects to accept the payments authorized by this subdivision in lieu of the payments authorized by subdivision (a) shall receive a moving expense and dislocation allowance which shall be determined according to a schedule established by the head of the lead agency. The schedule shall be consistent with the Residential Moving Expense and Dislocation Allowance Payment Schedule established by Part 24 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. (c) Any displaced person who moves or discontinues his or her business or farm operation and elects to accept the payment authorized by this subdivision in lieu of the payment authorized by subdivision (a), shall receive a fixed relocation payment in an amount equal to the average annual net earnings of the business or farm operation, except that the payment shall not be less than one thousand dollars ($1,000) nor more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000). In the case of a business, no payment shall be made under this subdivision, unless the public entity is satisfied that the business cannot be relocated without substantial loss of patronage and is not part of a commercial enterprise having at least one other establishment not being acquired, engaged in the same or similar business. For purposes of this subdivision, the term "average annual net earnings" means one-half of any net earnings of the business or farm operation before federal, state, and local income taxes during the two taxable years immediately preceding the taxable year in which the business or farm operation moves from the real property being acquired, or during any other period as the public entity determines to be more equitable for establishing earnings, and includes any compensation paid by the business or farm operation to the owner, his or her spouse, or his or her dependents during the two-year or other period. To be eligible for the payment authorized by this subdivision, the business or farm operation shall make available its state income tax records, financial statements, and accounting records, for confidential use pursuant to an audit to determine the payment pursuant to this subdivision. In regard to an outdoor advertising display, payment pursuant to this subdivision shall be limited to the amount necessary to physically move, or replace that display. Any displaced person eligible for payments under subdivision (a) who is displaced from the person's place of business or farm operation and who is eligible under criteria established Page8of 19 by the public entity, may elect to accept a fixed payment in lieu of the payment authorized by subdivision (a). The fixed payment shall not be less than one thousand dollars ($1,000) nor more than twenty thousand dollars ($20,000). A person whose sole business at the displacement dwelling is the rental of the property to others shall not qualify for a payment under this subdivision. (d) Whenever the acquisition of real property used for a business or farm operation causes the person conducting the business or farm operation to move from other real property, or to move his or her personal property from other real property, the person shall receive payments for moving and related expenses under subdivision (a) or (b) and relocation advisory assistance under Section 7261 for moving from the other property. (e) Whenever a public entity must pay the cost of moving a displaced person under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), or subdivision (d): (1) The costs of the move shall be exempt from regulation by the Public Utilities Commission. (2) The public entity may solicit competitive bids from qualified bidders for performance of the work. Bids submitted in response to the solicitations shall be exempt from regulation by the Public Utilities Commission. (f) No provision of this chapter shall be construed to require a public entity to provide any relocation assistance to a lessee if the property acquired for a program or project is subject to a lease for purposes of conducting farm operations and the public entity agrees to assume all of the terms of that lease. 7262.5. Notwithstanding Section 7265.3 or any other provision of law, tenants residing in any rental project who are displaced from the project for a period of one year or less as part of a rehabilitation of that project, that is funded in whole or in part by a public entity, shall not be eligible for permanent housing assistance benefits pursuant to Sections 7264 and 7264.5 if all of the following criteria are satisfied: (a) The project is a "qualified affordable housing preservation project," which means any complex of two or more units whose owners enter into a recorded regulatory agreement, having a term for the useful life of the project, with any entity for the provision of project rehabilitation financing. For this purpose, the regulatory agreement shall require of the owner and all successors and assigns of the owner, as long as the regulatory agreement is in effect, that at least 49 percent of the tenants in the project shall have, at the time of the recordation of the regulatory agreement, incomes not in excess of 60 percent of the area median income, adjusted by household size, as determined by the appropriate agency of the state. In addition, a project is a qualified affordable housing preservation project only if the beneficiary of the regulatory agreement elects this designation by so indicating on the regulatory agreement. in the same complex if his or her original unit is not otherwise available due to the rehabilitation, (b) The resident is offered the right to return to his or her original unit, or a comparable unit Page 9 of 19 with rent for the first 12 months subsequent to that return being the lower of the following: up to 5 percent higher than the rent at the time of displacement; or up to 30 percent of household income. (c) The estimated time of displacement is reasonable, and the temporary unit is not unreasonably impacted by the effects of the construction, taking into consideration the ages and physical conditions of the members of the displaced household. (d) All other financial benefits and services otherwise required under this chapter are provided to the residents temporarily displaced from their units, including relocation to a comparable replacement unit. Residents shall be temporarily relocated to a unit within the same complex, or to a unit located reasonably near the complex if that unit is in a location generally not less desirable than the location of the displaced person's dwelling with respect to public utilities, services, and the displaced person's place of employment. [Section 3 of Chapter 422 of the Statutes of 1998, provides as follows: The amendment to Section . . . 7262.5 of the Government Code made by this act shall apply prospectively only from January 1, 1999, and only to the extent that its provisions would not adversely affect existing rights of persons or households entitled to benefits under existing provisions on or before December 3 1, 1998.1 7263. (a) In addition to the payments required by Section 7262, the public entity, as a part of the cost of acquisition, shall make a payment to the owner of real property acquired for public use which is- improved with a dwelling actually owned and occupied by the owner as a permanent or customary and usual place of abode for not less than 180 days prior to the initiation of negotiation for the acquisition of that property. (b) The payment, not to exceed twenty-two thousand five hundred dollars ($22,500), shall be based on the following factors: (1) The amount, if any, which, when added to the acquisition cost of the dwelling acquired by the public entity equals the reasonable cost of a comparable replacement dwelling. (2) The amount, if any, which will compensate the displaced owner for any increased interest costs which the owner is required to pay for financing the acquisition of a comparable replacement dwelling. The amount shall be paid only if the dwelling acquired by the displacing agency was encumbered by a bona fide mortgage which was a valid lien on the dwelling for not less than 180 days immediately prior to the initiation of negotiations for the acquisition of the dwelling. All of the mortgages on the acquired dwelling shall be used to compute the payment. The amount shall be computed using the lesser of the principal balance of the mortgage on the replacement dwelling or the outstanding principal balance of the mortgage on the acquired dwelling and the lesser of the remaining term on the acquired dwelling or the actual term of the new mortgage. The present value of the increased interest costs shall be computed based on the lesser of the prevailing interest rate or the actual interest rate on the replacement property. The amount Page 10 of 19 shall also include other reasonable debt service costs incurred by the displaced owner. For the purposes of this subdivision, if the replacement dwelling is a mobilehome, the term "mortgage," as defined in subdivision (h) of Section 7260, shall include those liens as are commonly given to secure advances on, or the unpaid purchase price of, mobilehomes, together with the credit instruments, if any, secured thereby. (3) Reasonable expenses incurred by the displaced owner for evidence of title, recording fees, and other closing costs incident to the purchase of the replacement dwelling, but not including prepaid expenses. (c) The additional payment authorized by this section shall be made only to a displaced owner who purchases and occupies a decent, safe, and sanitary replacement dwelling within one year from the later of the following: (1) The date the displaced person receives final payment for the displacement dwelling, or in the case of condemnation, the date the full amount of estimated just compensation is deposited in court. (2) The date the displacing agency fulfills its obligation to make available at least one comparable replacement dwelling to the displaced person. However, the displacing agency may extend the period for good cause. Also, the displaced owner and the public entity may agree in writing that the displaced owner may remain in occupancy of the acquired dwelling as a tenant of the public entity on the conditions that the displaced owner shall only be entitled to the payment authorized by this section on the date on which the owner moves from the acquired dwelling and that the payment shall be in an amount equal to that to which the owner would have been entitled if the owner had purchased and occupied a repbcement dwelling one year subsequent to the date on which final payment was received for the acquired dwelling from the public entity. (d) In implementing this chapter, it is the intent of the Legislature that special consideration be given to the financing and location of a comparable replacement dwelling for displaced persons 62 years of age or older. 7263.5. For purposes of Section 7263, the leasing of a condominium for a 99-year period, or for a term which exceeds the life expectancy of the displaced person as determined from the most recent life tables in Vital Statistics of the United States, as published by the Public Health Service of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, shall be deemed a purchase of the condominium. 7264. (a) In addition to the payments required by Section 7262, as a part of the cost of acquisition, the public entity shall make a payment to any displaced person displaced from any dwelling not eligible to receive a payment under Section 7263 which was actually and lawfully occupied by the person as a permanent or customary and usual place of abode for not less than 90 Page 11 of 19 days prior to the initiation of negotiation by the public entity for the acquisition of the dwelling, or in any case in which displacement is not a direct result of acquisition, or any other event which the public entity shall prescribe. (b) The payment, not to exceed five thousand two hundred fifty dollars ($5,250), shall be the additional amount which is necessary to enable the person to lease or rent a comparable replacement dwelling for a period not to exceed 42 months, unless the displaced person meets one or more of the conditions set forth in paragraph (3) of subdivision (i) of Section 7260, in which case the payment, which shall not exceed five thousand two hundred fifty dollars ($5,250), shall be the additional amount which is necessary to enable the person to lease or rent a comparable replacement dwelling for a period not to exceed 48 months. However, publicly funded transportation projects shall make payments enabling the person to lease or rent a comparable replacement dwelling for a period not to exceed 42 months, including compensation for utilities, as provided in subdivision (b) of Section 24.402 of Part 24 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Payments up to the maximum of five thousand two hundred fifty dollars ($5,250) shall be made in a lump sum. Should an agency pay pursuant to Section 7264.5 an amount exceeding the maximum amount, payment may be made periodically. Computation of a payment under this subdivision to a low-income displaced person for a comparable replacement dwelling shall take into account the person's income. (c) Any person eligible for a payment under subdivision (a) may elect to apply the payment to a downpayment on, and other incidental expenses pursuant to, the purchase of a decent, safe, and sanitary replacement dwelling. The person may, at the discretion of the public entity, be eligible under this subdivision for the maximum payment allowed under subdivision (b), except that, in the case of a displaced homeowner who has owned and occupied the displacement dwelling for at least 90 days but not more than 180 days immediately prior to the initiation of negotiations for the acquisition of the dwelling, the payment shall not exceed the payment which the person would otherwise have received under subdivision (b) of Section 7263 had the person owned and occupied the displacement dwelling 180 days immediately prior to the initiation of the negotiations. (d) In implementing this chapter, it is the intent of the Legislature that special consideration shall be given to assisting any displaced person 62 years of age or older to locate or lease or rent a comparable replacement dwelling. [Section 4 of Chapter 597 of the Statutes of 1997, provides as follows: The amendment to Sections 7260, 7262.5, and 7264, made by this act shall apply prospectively only from January 1, 1998, and shall apply only to the extent that they do not adversely affect existing rights of persons or households entitled to benefits under this chapter on or before December 3 1, 1997.1 7264.5. (a) If a program or project undertaken by the public entity cannot proceed on a timely basis because comparable replacement housing is not available and the public entity determines that comparable replacement housing cannot otherwise be made available, the public entity shall take any action necessary or appropriate to provide the dwellings by use of funds Page 12 of 19 authorized for the project. This section shall be construed to authorize the public entity to exceed the maximum amounts which may be paid under Sections 7263 and 7264 on a case-by-case basis for good cause as determined in accordance with rules and regulations adopted by the public entity. Where a displacing agency is undertaking a project with funds administered by a state agency or board, and where the displacing agency has adopted rules and regulations in accordance with Section 7267.8 for the implementation of this chapter, the determination of payments to be made pursuant to this subdivision shall be pursuant to those rules and regulations. (b) No person shall be required to move from his or her dwelling because of its acquisition by a public entity, unless comparable replacement housing is available to the person. (c) For purposes of determining the applicability of subdivision (a), the public entity is hereby designated as a duly authorized administrative body of the state for the purposes of subdivision (c) of Section 408 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. (d) Subdivision (b) shall not apply to a displaced owner who agrees in writing with the public entity to remain in occupancy of the acquired dwelling as provided in subdivision (c) of Section 7263. 7265. (a) In addition to the payments required by Section 7262, as a cost of acquisition, the public entity shall make a payment to any affected property owner meeting the requirements of this section. (b) The affected property shall be immediately contiguous to property acquired for airport purposes and the owner shall have owned the property affected by acquisition by the public entity not less than 180 days prior to the initiation of negotiation for acquisition of the acquired property. (c) The payment, not to exceed twenty-two thousand five hundred dollars ($22,500), shall be the amount, if any, which equals the actual decline in the fair market value of the property of the affected property owner caused by the acquisition by the public entity for airport purposes of other real property and a change in the use of the property. (d) The amount, if any, of actual decline in fair market value of affected property shall be determined according to rules and regulations adopted by the public entity pursuant to this chapter. The rules and regulations shall limit payment under this section only to those circumstances in which the decline in fair market value of affected property is reasonably related to objective physical change in the use of acquired property. 7265.3. (a) A public entity may make payments in the amounts it deems appropriate, and may provide advisory assistance under this chapter, to a person who moves from a dwelling or who moves or discontinues his business, as a result of impending rehabilitation or demolition of a residential or commercial structure, or enforcement of building, housing, or health codes by a public entity or because of systematic enforcement pursuant to Section 37924.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or who moves from a dwelling or who moves or discontinues a business as a result of a rehabilitation or demolition program or enforcement of building codes by the public entity, or Page 13 of 19 because of increased rents to result from such rehabilitation or code enforcement. Payments prescribed by subdivision (b) of Section 7264 may also be made to persons who remain in a dwelling during rehabilitation. Payments authorized by this section and made pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 7264 may, at the option of the public entity, be computed and reviewed annually based on actual rental increases, and may be paid monthly or annually. A public entity may also give priority to a person who moves from a dwelling, or who remains in a dwelling during rehabilitation, in utilization of local, state, or federal rental assistance programs, either to enable the person to pay increased rents or to move to other suitable housing. A public entity assisting in the financing of rehabilitation may provide some or all of the payments authorized by this section as part of the loan for rehabilitation costs, provided that the public entity makes payments directly to the person who moves or who remains in the dwelling during rehabilitation. (b) A public entity shall make payments in the amounts prescribed by this chapter, and shall provide advisory assistance under this chapter, to persons and families of low or moderate income, as defined in Section 50093" of the Health and Safety Code, whose rent, within one year after the rehabilitation of their dwelling is completed, is increased to an amount exceeding 25 percent of their gross income, or who move from their dwelling, as the result of a rehabilitation program in which the rehabilitation work is wholly or partially financed or assisted with public funds provided by or through the public entity. (c) A public entity shall provide temporary housing for up to 90 days to persons displaced by rehabilitation work which is wholly or partially financed or assisted with public funds provided by or through the public entity. (d) A person displaced by rehabilitation work which is wholly or partially financed or assisted with public funds provided by or through the public entity shall, as a condition of the financing or assistance, be given the option of relocating, after rehabilitation, in the dwelling from which the person was displaced. (e) A public entity may limit the amounts of payments made pursuant to subdivision (b), otherwise calculated pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 7264, to the lesser of (i) the difference between the increased rent and 25 percent of gross income; or (ii) the difference between the increased rent and the rent immediately before the rehabilitation which was greater than 25 percent of gross income. (f) The payments and advisory assistance as required in this section shall be mandatory only if federal or state funds are available. However, nothing shall preclude the public entity from using local funds. 7265.4. In addition to the payments required by Section 7262, as a cost of acquisition, the public entity, as soon as practicable after the date of payment of the purchase price or the date of deposit in court of funds to satisfy the award of compensation in a condemnation proceeding to acquire real property, whichever is the earlier, shall reimburse the owner, to the extent the public Page 14of 19 entity deems fair and reasonable, for expenses the owner necessarily incurred for recording fees, transfer taxes, and similar expenses incidental to conveying such real property to the public entity. 7266. (a) If a relocation appeals board has been established pursuant to Section 33417.5 of the Health and Safety Code, a city by ordinance may designate the board to hear appeals from all public entities, except those state agencies which have an appeal process on the eligibility for, or the amount of, a payment authorized by this chapter. (b) Any person aggrieved by a determination as to eligibility for, or the amount of, a payment authorized by this chapter may have the application reviewed by the public entity or by the relocation appeals board if authorized under subdivision (a). The review of a determination by a community redevelopment agency may only be made by a relocation appeals board established pursuant to Section 33417.5 of the Health and Safety Code. 7267. In order to encourage and expedite the acquisition of real property by agreements with owners, to avoid litigation and relieve congestion in the courts, to assure consistent treatment for owners in the public programs, and to promote public confidence in public land acquisition practices, public entities shall, to the greatest extent practicable, be guided by the provisions of Section 7267.1 to 7267.7, inclusive, except that the provisions of subdivision (b) of Section 7267.1 and Section 7267.2 shall not apply to the acquisition of any easement, right-of-way, covenant, or other nonpossessory interest in real property to be acquired for the construction, reconstruction, alteration, enlargement, maintenance, renewal, repair, or replacement of subsurface sewers, waterlines or appurtenances, drains, septic tanks, or storm water drains. 7267.1. (a) The public entity shall make every reasonable effort to acquire expeditiously real property by negotiation. (b) Real property shall be appraised before the initiation of negotiations, and the owner, or the owner's designated representative, shall be given an opportunity to accompany the appraiser during his or her inspection of the property. However, the public entity may prescribe a procedure to waive the appraisal in cases involving the acquisition by sale or donation of property with a low fair market value. 7267.2. (a) Prior to adopting a resolution of necessity pursuant to Section 1245.230* and initiating negotiations for the acquisition of real property, the public entity shall establish an amount which it believes to be just compensation therefor, and shall make an offer to the owner or owners of record to acquire the property for the full amount so established, unless the owner cannot be located with reasonable diligence. The offer may be conditioned upon the legislative body's ratification of the offer by execution of a contract of acquisition or adoption of a resolution of necessity or both. In no event shall the amount be less than the public entity's approved appraisal of the fair market value of the property. Any decrease or increase in the fair market value of real property to be acquired prior to the date of valuation caused by the public improvement for which the property is acquired, or by the likelihood that the property would be acquired for the improvement, other than that due to physical deterioration within the reasonable control of the owner or occupant, shall be disregarded in determining the compensation for the property. The Page 15 of 19 public entity shall provide the owner of real property to be acquired with a written statement of, and summary of the basis for, the amount it established as just compensation. Where the property involved is owner occupied residential property and contains no more than four residential units, the homeowner shall, upon request, be allowed to review a copy of the appraisal upon which the offer is based. Where appropriate, the just compensation for the real property acquired and for damages to remaining real property shall be separately stated. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), a public entity may make an offer to the owner or owners of record to acquire real property for less than an amount which it believes to be just compensation therefor if (1) the real property is offered for sale by the owner at a specified price less than the amount the public entity believes to be just compensation therefor, (2) the public entity offers a price which is equal to the specified price for which the property is being offered by the landowner, and (3) no federal funds are involved in the acquisition, construction, or project development. (c) As used in subdivision (b), "offered for sale" means any of the following: (1) Directly offered by the landowner to the public entity for a specified price in advance of negotiations by the public entity. (2) Offered for sale to the general public at an advertised or published, specified price set no more than six months prior to and still available at the time the public entity initiates contact with the landowner regarding the public entity's possible acquisition of the property. 7267.3. The construction or development of a public improvement shall be so scheduled that, to the greatest extent practicable, no person lawfully occupying real property shall be required to move from a dwelling, assuming a replacement dwelling will be available, or to move his business or farm operation, without at least 90 days' written notice from the public entity of the date by which such move is required. 7267.4. If the public entity permits an owner or tenant to occupy the real property acquired on a rental basis for a short term, or for a period subject to termination by the public entity on short notice, the amount of rent required shall not exceed the fair rental value of the property to a short- term occupier. 7267.5. In no event shall the public entity either advance the time of condemnation, or defer negotiations or condemnation and the deposit of funds in court for the use of the owner, or take any other action coercive in nature, in order to compel an agreement on the price to be paid for the property. 7267.6. If any interest in real property is to be acquired by exercise of the power of eminent domain, the public entity shall institute formal condemnation proceedings. No public entity shall intentionally make it necessary for an owner to institute legal proceedings to prove the fact of the taking of his real property. Page 16 of 19 7267.7. (a) If the acquisition of only a portion of a property would leave the remaining portion in such a shape or condition as to constitute an uneconomic remnant, the public entity shall offer to acquire the entire property if the owner so desires. (b) A person whose real property is being acquired in accordance with this chapter may, after the person has been fully informed of his or her right to receive just compensation for the property, donate the property, any part thereof, any interest therein, or any compensation paid therefor to a public entity determined by the person. 7267.8. (a) All public entities shall adopt rules and regulations to implement payments and to administer relocation assistance under this chapter. These rules and regulations shall be in accordance with the rules and regulations adopted by the Department of Housing and Community Development. (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), with respect to a federally funded project, a public entity shall make relocation assistance payments and provide relocation advisory assistance as required under federal law. [See Health and Safety Code, Section 50460*] 7267.9. (a) Prior to the initiation of negotiations for acquisition by a public entity or public utility of nonprofit, special use property, as defined by Section 1235.155* of the Code of Civil Procedure, the acquiring public entity or public utility shall make every reasonable effort to seek alternative property which is other than nonprofit, special use property. However, this requirement shall not apply to properties acquired by public entities for transportation purposes, including, but not limited to, the construction, expansion, or improvement of streets, highways, or railways. (b) This section does not apply to actions or proceedings commenced by a public entity or public utility to acquire real property or any interest in real property for the use of water, sewer, electricity, telephone, natural gas, or flood control facilities or rights-of-way where those acquisitions neither require removal or destruction of existing improvements, nor render the property unfit for the owner's present or proposed use. [Section 7 of Chapter 7 of the Statutes of 1992 provides as follows with respect to Section 7267.9 as added by that act: SEC. 7. The changes made by this act shall apply to eminent domain actions or proceedings commenced on or after January 1, 1993 .] 7269. (a) No payment received by any person under this chapter or as tenant relocation assistance required by any state statute or local ordinance shall be considered as income for the purposes of the Personal Income Tax Law, Part 10 (commencing with Section 17001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or the Bank and Corporation Tax Law, Part 11 (commencing with Section 23001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code. Page 17 of 19 (b) No payment received by any person under this chapter shall be considered as income or resources to any recipient of public assistance and such payments shall not be deducted from the amount of aid to which the recipient would otherwise be entitled under any other provisions of law. 7269.1. Where a recipient of relocation benefits payments under federal or state law is also a general assistance recipient under Part 5 (commencing with Section 17000) of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and two or more rent schedules apply to the recipient, the highest shall prevail and any excess amount over lower rent schedule shall not be counted as income or resources for general assistance purposes under Part 5 (commencing with Section 17000) of Division 9 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. 7270. Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed as creating in any condemnation proceedings brought under the power of eminent domain any element of damages not in existence on the date of enactment of this chapter. 7271. If any provision of this chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this chapter which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this chapter are severable. 7272. If under any other provision of law of this state the owner or occupant of real property acquired by a public entity for public use is given greater protection than is provided by Sections 7265.3 to 7267.8, inclusive, the public entity shall also comply with such other provision of law. 7272.3. It is the intent of the Legislature, by this chapter, to establish minimum requirements for relocation assistance payments by public entities. This chapter shall not be construed to limit any other authority which a public entity may have to make other relocation assistance payments, or to make any relocation assistance payment in an amount which exceeds the maximum amount for such payment authorized by this chapter. Any public entity may, also, make any other relocation assistance payment, or may make any relocation assistance payment in an amount which exceeds the maximum amount for such payment authorized by this chapter, if the making of such payment, or the payment in such amount, is required under federal law to secure federal funds. 7272.5. Nothing contained in this article shall be construed as creating in any condemnation proceeding brought under the power of eminent domain, any element of damages not in existence on the date the public entity commences to make payments under the provisions of this article as amended by the act which enacted this section at the 1971 Regular Session of the Legislature. 7273. Funds received pursuant to Sections 2106 and 2107 of the Streets and Highways Code may be expended by a city to compensate displaced persons for their moving expenses because of the construction of city highways or streets. Page 18 of 19 7274. Section 7267 to 7267.7, inclusive, create no rights or liabilities and shall not affect the validity of any property acquisitions by purchase or condemnation. 7275. Whenever any public entity acquires real property by eminent domain, purchase, or exchange, the purchase price and other consideration paid by such entity is public information and shall be made available upon request from the entity concerned. 7276. (a) If a resolution is adopted under Section 1245.330 of the Code of Civil Procedure consenting to the acquisition of property by eminent domain and the person authorized by the resolution to acquire the property by eminent domain acquires the property by purchase, eminent domain, or otherwise, that person shall provide relocation advisory assistance and shall make any of the payments required to be made by public entities pursuant to the provisions of this chapter in conformity with this chapter and the guidelines adopted by the Commission of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 7268. (b) This section does not apply to public utilities which are subject to the provisions of Article 6 (commencing with Section 600) of Chapter 3 of Part 1 of Division 1 of the Public Utilities Code or to public entities which are subject to this chapter. 7277. (a) The requirement to provide relocation assistance and benefits imposed by this chapter shall not apply to a purchase of property which is offered for sale by the owner, property being sold at execution or foreclosure sale, or property being sold pursuant to court order or under court supervision if the property in any of the foregoing situations is either occupied by the owner or is unoccupied, and if the offer for sale is not induced by public entity disposition, planned condemnatio-n, or redevelopment of surrounding lands, and if the sales price is fair market value or less, as determined by a qualified appraiser, and if no federal funds are involved in the acquisition, construction, or project development. "Offered for sale" means either advertised for sale in a publication of general circulation published at least once a week or listed with a licensed real estate broker and published in a multiple listing, pursuant to Section 1087 of the Civil Code. (b) At the the of making an offer to acquire property under subdivision (a), public entities shall notify the property owner in writing, of the following: (1) The public entity's plans for developing the property to be acquired or the surrounding property. (2) Any relocation assistance and benefits provided pursuant to state law which the property owner may be foregoing. Page 19 of 19 -California Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Guidelines (“State Guidelines”) ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - F-3 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT . Bnxlnys Oficinl .LALI FORNIA I CODEOF REGULATIONS Title 25. Housing and L Community- - Development Division 1. Housing and Community Development Department oF Housing and Community Development Programs Chapter 6. Vel. 33 Published by B.UCLAYS LAW PLBLISHER~ 50 California Suect Pu'inctccnth Flwr San Francisco, CA 941 11 8W8%3600 . :-7-- ___ . . - .- i I. Chapter 6. Department of Housing and Connunit]; Development Progrms ;.,xi? I. 4 awo. 5 6c3J. 5 6C32. 5 6'36. 5 6C8. 5 BSO. 5 9x2. Article 3. 5 6C80. 7:. G%E!Zl -- I or=? e! ,W:xn. S:;:?ny.t -,I .?*:r;css acc =: IC;. C;:iicatilir! a?.c EGZY~~CI*~. F. @aiio E. c a~nnloas. Pricr 0eter:ina:iccs. . Citizm Par,c:cat:on. F:ereqisitt :o Ciiclacernec:. .. - Remdes. Pricnv ol Fkeral Law. Saverat&/. Re!ccaticn Assis;anco Advisory P:cgran and Assurance c f Corn p arxl? . Purmq. Rolcutmn Auiabnce ACII~Q~/ Program. EliqbiliP/. Rehatilihlmn. Oomolition. Glo Enforcemecrt. Relocation Plan. Minimum 8eqiremmb of Relaadon Pzaiabnce +ciitor/ P:oqrarn. fieflacanenl Houting Paor :9 Oisplacemcnl: Nobcar :a Oi3phCed Peaan3. Tmcorarl Move. Inlamnational Program. Suriey and Analpit 01 Rebclbon N-. Failure lo Conduc: Trnoly and Efisctive Survey. Survey and Analvis of Available Relocation Remurcn. La31 Ream Hou3ing. Tormination of Reloution hsishnce. Eiic5on. Evaluatjcn ot ir.elow:on. Re';l.xen en: Hcr: sins 29 253 Relccation Payments Purpose. Relocation Payrnmb by kbiic Entity. &sic Etigitility Conditions. Notice ol Intent lo Oisplace. Filing ol Claims: Suhnis5on of Tax Returns. AcLal Reasonable Moving Expen1e3. Actual Direct Lass= of Tangible Peoooal Prop*/. Actual ReasonttAe Exp-3- in Searching lor a Replacement eUsincai or Farm. Moving msea4u:ccor Wdjsing ausinesseu. 5 5 l5C. 5 a:a2. 5 516;. 5 5:e6. 5 5 :Ea. 5 6:70. 5 6172. 5 0174. 5 6176. 5 6 180. ---Article E. 5 8182. 5 6184. 5 alae. 5 6186. Procelurbs. t .. ~~~ Chzcisr 6. Oeptrtnent c: Hcusins ;mi Communi?/ Devehcnent Frcg rzns Subci72pt~r 1. Relocation AssisSnce 2nd Re21 Property Acquisition Guidelines 3 6004. Appllcablllty and Supersedure. (a) Except JS okerwix noted in this xcucn. the Cuide!incs ar: appli- ciblrtoalldispl~c~mcnt ud xquisitiun rTcue;nscin or lrrrrthcircilLc. tivc daw. J;L7uq I. L977. liner, J 6008. Oeflnlllons. Tnc followin\r IrmG shall rncm -- .. P.qe ?ti 1 J 6016. Aemedles. (1) [fhe public cnCt./ hu not fulNlcd oris nor substwtisll:; P~lCi!!Lis its rclccatioa rcspsibilitics. it shdl ccuc displxe=et~ uctd rcci tUr.c. JS its rcsixmibilities a fulfdled. When appropeak pn,kcc inplc=cn. uti00 shall k. suspnded or terminated. (b) Eligible pr;ccs who movc withcut offcc of usisuccr y..d tat. liK. after the public entity'wu rcquircd 10 offer usisuncc or te3cfiti. shall be provided such xsistulcc and p:m.cnc acd. when appnpriac. cmpsxion for dditicnd cats incurxd. Thc displxins cniirj shall d4c evcrj cifon to identify md lccar~ such pnons:. (c) A public entity rniy pay acornplainmi's u;oery': fees LX! cws UL! is cncoun3cd to considcrduins so when a ccmclainsr,t k.:::tutcz ;I scc;e:sful admicismrive appd or judicial acticc. (d) Tnc cnumc:ation of rcrncdie: in his scction is not iatcndcd 11) di:. ccun;. or pcludc hc ux of olher rcrnectics ccnris:csr with the invnt of dx Act md Gcidelines. Rather a public cntity is cnccung.:d toconsid- er und adopt der rcnirdies. ' J 6018. If a public entiry undcn&es a project widr fedcrd finmcid IS ;Isuccc . and conscqucndy must provide ~laiuun jssistvlce and benefic, 3: E. quircd by federd law. the provisions of the Act and CuiGliccs shall na apply: but if m &liption to provide rclccation Jssisunce and 'wncfiu is not impscd by frdcd law the provisions of rbr: Act and CuicSrlincs Prlorlty of Federal Law. shdl apply. 4 6020. Severablllty. If any provisim oi the Guidelines or he applicatim rhercoiis held in- vdid. such invdidity shall not affect olher provisims or applicatiuns of he Guidelines which CM & given effect wihcut he invalid provision or application. md tothis end the provisionsof the Guidelines xc srvenblc. .... . .. . .. . .. . . , .- .. -. . . . . . ~ -- ,~- .,~ . ... .. .. Page 26.( .. -? 4 6038. Fielowtlcn Plan. shdl provide tensfirs as mquircd by Chssc Guidelice: XL! 1x2 Rc!xa. tion La-w 'withcut cocplixcc wiCh this sccrion. (5) A Rclccaticn P1y1 shall iccludc thc foUowinc: (4) h dcscnpricn of Lhr relocation pyrncnt: to be ma& (~T.'J=L to ,~-.iclc 3) XCL J plvl for disbummcnt. (7) r\ ccst cs:icat fmcLing out the plan y..d idcndficaiicn oi Lye scuxc oi kc ncctrsvy fucds. (3) A dcuiled plm by which my Iasr reso[: hcuring (xi Cescrit4 in scc5on 6552 ud A.xiclc d) is to bc built ax! fciccd. . (9) A. s;dd 'cfmitim saLemcnt to& scac IO dI pr,.:r; :ote 55. pl~ced (xi rquirec by section 60.16). ( IO) Tczpru: rekcation plans. if my. ( 1) A desc~prioo of crlccxioa office opxioc pm"f:xs (12) P!v5 forcitizcn parkipation. (13) rL? cnurr.e:aGon of the coordinsuon activities uzle;..lke? (ar. (12) Tne cow.cnts of the relocation comminee. if wy (pr,uan: 10 ( IS) h writtende*rinination by rhr public cauty ~'1at be ncccs:~r./ re- (c) A Plan prepred by alad public enuty shdl be ccnsismt Wi;! ~'1e suut to xcuon COS',). sccticn 6311). SCUKCS will k available Y quired. lad housing clezxar. (d) tn &e event of delay of morc than one yeu in the i=plrne%dcc of the rclccation pmprn. the plan shall tx u+red pfiur to inplcxxsta. $ 6042. Replacemenf Houdng Prlor to Dleplncernent; (a) iuoeligiblc pmm shdl be rcquhd LO move from hi: dwc!li=; un. less wichin J rrscrubic pcnd of timc priortodi:piaccacni cocicanblc rc$acezxat dwelling (Y defined in subsection 6COE(c)) a:. ir. kc cax oi a tcnrprq r.ovc (Y dcilrxd in scction 60J.i). x!rquitc sFi..r:..-;..cci 2.wcllinc; (X dcfmcd .,? subscction (b) below) arc avliiabic iu such Fr. sm. @) Tne ciwria fcr dcqualr rrpluemcnt dwelling uu in JII rcspcl: identical to thox rorcmprable rcp~accncnl dwlhg. CSCcpl Cht m adcquite replaccmcnr dw!ling wiIh rcspct LO rhc numic: oi ~cm. hlbiublelivin~sp3ccyldr/~ofccnstruction.nccdbcoaiy~cquawncc cwpnble. Nollces to Oleplaced Pemono. (c) Rcvmlblc Offerof Replacement Hcusing. Tnc rcquiremenu of his section shd k dnmcd tohavc ken satisfied if a pel;cn is ofrerrd L?d refuses without justification rcjsmJblc cbcice-, of spccificdly identified companble replacement d*wc!iina which iull;i s3tisQ rhc cri~eria set for& in the Cuidclincs. Toe offcn shdl ti in astir- ns. Iunya_ee undcwnxf by thedisFivcd pzr;on.Tne numkof oi- fers dcter;ni?ed to k relsonable shmld be nut less hm rhrce. (d) Noucc. lu'oeligiblc peaon cccup+ng propxcy shd1 be required LO move from a dwelling or to move a business or fun opcdca. wirhoui at levi 90 d3ys writen noiicc frcm the public enucy requiring he disp\actaexs. Public enuties shall notify exh individual lrnvlt tobe displaced Y well Y each mncr-cccupant. ~oesc rcqukments are in addition to Lhosc ccnlained in sections 604 and 604.) - .. (e) Waive:. Thc rcquixncnt in rubsectioa(a) above my be waived only whea im- mcdiatc pwssicn of rcaI propy is of cmcial inmcc ud by me of he fullowing circumsruces: .I 6052. Sumoy and Analydi of Avallablo Relocatlon . J 6054. bet flwft Houelng. (a) No eligible penon shdl be required to move from his dwelling be- cause of the actio0 of a public entity unless comparable rtpluemen[ housing is avdable to him. (b) IC on the basis of its survey and mdysis olnlmarim neds and rr- SCUKCS a plblic eatiy cannot Irkrminc Btt companble re+~:ma[ 4 6094. Actual Reasonable Expenses In SsarchIncj lor a Repl.xement'Buslnes: or Farm. of rccticn 60% wih rtspct to actual revonable mavins cspr:sc:. shdl be cligjble for a pa:zeztb an mount aot toexcced S L .CcO. in sci.renmS for a rtpluerr,cnt bisincss or fan. including ex~n:cs incurrcc! for .$ 6096. Mov1n.g Expecrsee--Outdoor Adverflslng Eualnm3aee. ins in be plrchase. sde. resde. rnulufactuK. praessins. or maixehz or products. cocmcdities. pnoasl propny. or wrticcs by he erccuon Lqd nairttcnurcr of ouldoor adwnisins displays is entihd to p:tmcnt for rhc re:lscnable CMI of moving such displays or lhcir in-place valuv. 4 6098. Alternate Payments-lndlvlduals and Famllles. h pncm or fmily. who is displaced from 3 dwelling md is eligjble for a payment [or actual revonable rnovingexpnscs unGrsectim 60%. may elect to cceivc and shdl be paid. in lieu or such payment a moving esp-ix uddislocaticn dlowanccdetermincd in ~.ccordu?ce wirh esub lished FeGrd Eighw3y Administntion schedules maintained by the Cdifornia Depanmrnr of Tmsptim. Vor, Aurhonq ciud: Section SW60. Hcd~h and Sdcry Cdc. Rcfemct: Zec. urn 7163b). Government Calc. Himmr I. Arnc.drncnr ol rubucuon [a) fikd 11-5-76 in erncncrry: dcrienaicd cf. fxovc 11-27-76 (RCZ,ISIC~ 76.60. Y). (1) Tac businc:: is ncc opntclf solziy (0: rmtd Fur;cres c~ct tx rclccitcd wirhcul J. subrutid lcss of its csis:ing pat-ccagc. bud ~n its +ipd Iccxion: I Page 276.2 . .. 61541 $ 61a. Notice of Lnd Acquisition ProceOures. 111 A: rf..c ri: L-.c pc5iic ::Ut:/ noriiics m owncroiirs cccisicr. :o 2;- thc ou.r.c:a u-tit:cn c.+x!icr. ;fits iL?d ac;uisiticc trcc=.'z=s. Ccb.bing in non-cc::=?ic.'. ~:kri;d- stic tczs t!c cuolic cxiyl's acquisiuon pc:Cur:s std iic c.:+ii fi~i-,~ ar.d opticns avliiablc to rhc ownc:. ~i! ?ncc::~ it ski! (b) Tnc notic: rhd kc!udc thc foilowing: [ 1) A dcs+.Fcon oflhc bvic objcc:ivc of the public c-tit!'s I.-C ac- quisition prom urd 3r:fc:nc: to thc avaihbilit:t of thc public cxit:/*s sutcmcnt covc5g rc!ocation Pcnchu for which an ownc:-ccupult may bc cligiblc: '. (2) A sutc=cnt that [Scownaorhis rcprc%nutivcdcsigxcd in wit- hg shall bc givcn the OFFOKUflity to Jc:ompmy clch appniw: d~;~?g his hspction Of lhc p0pS:y. . (3)A ~rarc~.cntthatiIthcacquisilion ofurypanofrc~pro~r,:~.would lcavc thc owncr with ~r uncconotnic rcmmnt Y dcfurcd in suoncc:ion 6 131( g) the public cnut:i will offcr to jcqukc rhc uncconomic rcmurr. rhc Owner SO dc:ircs: - (4) A statccxcnt that if he owner is not satisfied with thc public cntity's oifc of just cornpensarion hc will bc gpcn a rcasonablc oppomcity to prcscnt rclcvurt rnatc3. which thc public cntity will cxcfully coridc:. md that if a volunury agtzcmcnt CJMdt be rcichcd rhc public cnut;~. J: soon JS possibic. will cithc: institute a fomii condcmiuon prccccdin; ssiinst rhc po~Zy or abandon its intention to.xquirc thc propcr.:i. giv. ins notic: oi kc IaKc: u provided in section 6 190. .. (5) A statc=c?.t that construction or dc-4opmcnr of3 prgjcc: sbs!l bc so schcdulcd that no v::on lawhlly occupying rrd povz:~ sksll bc rc- qukd to mow $om adwllinS [assuming a rcplucncnt d*wclLig as rc. quind by thcsc Guidclim will bc available) or to movc his bu mc:: ' or fw opmtion without at lest W$ays 5ncn noucc &om thc public cn- 16) A statczxnt that. if mngcmcnts arc mide'ro rcnt the prupcny to m owncr,or his tcnmt for a shon tcrm or for J pcid subjcct 10 tcrroini- tion byrhcpubliccntityonshonnoticc.thcrcn~willnotcsccc~d..clcss. cr of thc fair rcntll vduc of thc propcny to shon tcm occupicr or thc pro nu'ponion of thc fLr =nul vduc for i typical rend pcEcd. If rhc owe: or msnt is an occupnr of a dwelling. the Ental for thc dwciling shall k wi&in his finmcid mans. (Sc: subscaion WYic).) . ' ., .. "city of thc ditc by which thc movc is required: and .' , ..I.. .,.. g 6190. Notlce of Public Entlty's Declsion Not to Acqulre. W?xmcvc a public cnrity which has forwardcd a Noticc of Decision to Appraise or has msdc a fm offcr subscqucntly dccidcs nor to scquirc .. .. 'I x 'Subchapter 5. Departmnt of Housing 2nd - Cornmunitv Developnent-Conflict of -,-. . Subchapter 2. California Low-Incorne Home Management Training Program _. Subchapter 3. Housing Element Guidelines ..... - .... ... : :. .: ..: ,usociav Cavrrnmenul Propm Andysu: ~uff Servicsr Analysts (etc:pt u1 he Per:orncIOKlc:i: btanagcmcnt Scrrics Tcchcian: Busmc~ Manapncnc ............... Lcpirhrrve DI\;SIO~ &pucy Duccur. Ar:isunl &puiy Duecur.. ........................ I Suff Scrricos Mmag:rs (all Icrclr): - ~::ociau Cw:mmcnul Propam Analysk SuHSerrice: halysc ....................................... 15: I chick Suft Wanqement Audkor. Staff Scrvicts SIamgcmcm Audiror. Aszxucc !wtanagmcnc Audimr: ..... 5 I- ' An&; DiviJion Howiny Pol+ Oevelopmrnf Division Depucy Dkcmr. Assisuni Cepury DirCcr~k . Housing and Communiry Development Manac:rr (111 Icvehi: Hausin5 and Cornmunit?/ &*relapmcnt S~&ti:'; (aU Icvck:): Housing and Community R*elcpmcnr.Rcprswnuu~~c: (all Icvcl:~: ........ Ocpury Duecor. Assi-unt &pury.Dcc'ar..A:situnc Cluef ............. Civil Engurccrs (d Icvclrl: .. Cdc: ~d Shdlrd: Adrnuwnlor: (a11 levct~: Dislrict R:?rc-rnucivc: (aU IcvcIs): Sur Scrric:: !4yUgrr t: As:cciau Architect: ~lubi1chcmc'R:eisuirion Manas:r, Mobikhomc Rcpsuauar Supcruiwr Ill: : :. , ' Mobilchome RcgisuauonSpeciaGrt .......... .'. ................... .. I Codes and Sron&ords Riririon ........... I J Special Assi:anl (O the Cvpucy Dnc'ar ............................ Housine tnd Canmunil:/ Devclopmcni Rcprzsenutive: (aU Icvclsi: Housing and Ccmmuniiy Development Spcciabsl; (all Icvclsl: California Indian Hourin3 R:prcscnutivc: (all Icvelr~: . . California hdim Hourln; !dmi;:rs (all le*clr): Housing md Ccmmunici Ceclopmcni Maniecr: (all Icvcb): Associav Covcmcnul Ropm haly;c: Mmapncnt Scrviccs TeciuuciuLc: Suff Scrvic-s hilysc: Hausme Cmsoucuon hnd Rchabitiuum Spcculiscs: Lain and Cnnt Comminc: hlcmbers ............................... I 2 Conrulunu' . . 'Conrulunu shall disclore pu;:uanm~ UI he broadest dirclorurc cav3ccy in th: code subject UI Ihc followinq hiutim: ................. __ ....... .... offer who will file Be sutement 3 ~ FOE Authwity cite& Section 87303. .. .. t 1 An Analysis of the Preliminary Plan The Preliminary Plan for the Project (“Preliminary Plan”) was approved by the Carlsbad Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) on October 6, 1999. The Preliminary Plan described the boundaries of the Project Area and included general statements of the proposed land uses, layout of principal streets, population densities, building intensities, and building standards. It also addressed how the Plan would attain the purposes of the Redevelopment Law. It discussed the conformance with the General Plan and discussed the impact of the Project upon residents and the surrounding neighborhood. The Plan conforms with the standards and provisions of the Preliminary Plan, as detailed below: Proiect Area Location and Description: This section of the Preliminary Plan describes the boundaries of the Project Area. The proposed boundaries are identical to those described in the Preliminary Plan, with the exception of the Lanakai mobilehome park, which was removed by the Commission after the Preliminary Plan was prepared. - General Statement of Proposed Planning Elements: This section of the Preliminary Plan states that Project Area land uses, proposed layouts of principal streets, proposed population densities, proposed building intensities, and proposed building standards shall be subject to and controlled by the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and other local codes, as amended from time to time. These planning elements have been incorporated into the Plan. Additionally, the Plan does not propose any changes to population or development densities or land use designations. 0 Attainment of the Purposes of the Redevelopment Law: This section of the Preliminary Plan generally sets forth the objectives of the Project Area. To this end, the Plan contains a detailed list of redevelopment goals that permit the Commission to complete its redevelopment program to eliminate persisting blighting conditions in the Project Area in accordance with the Redevelopment Law. 0 Conformance to the General Plan: Both the Preliminary Plan and Plan conform to the standards, policies and provisions of the General Plan, as they exist or are hereafter amended. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - G-1- SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT General Impact of the Proposed Proiect Upon the Residents of the Proiect Area and Surrounding Neighborhoods: This section of the Preliminary Plan states that residents in and around the Project Area will benefit from improved traffic circulation, public facilities and services, environmental quality, employment opportunlty and economic development activity effectuated by implementation of the Plan. Other impacts associated with the implementation of the Plan have been assessed and analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report on the Plan, included in Section K of this Report, and the Neighbohood Impact Report, incorporated in Section M of this Report. The Plan provides the Commission with the redevelopment tools and policies necessary to achieve positive impacts and mitigate negative impacts. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - G-2 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT The Report and Recommendations of the Planning Commission The Planning Commission adopted its report on the drafl Plan on June 7, 2000, a copy of which follows this page. The Planning Commission resolution included a recommendation that the City Council adopt the Plan. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - H-I - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 1 2 3 4 5 .6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4786 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLAN”G COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG PORTIONS OF CARLSBAD BOULEVARD, PONTO ROAD, AND CANNON ROAD, INCLUDING THE ENCINA POWER GENERATING PLANT, REPORT, EIR 99-01 FOR THE SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, OTHER PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY, AND VARIOUS INDUSTRIAL, SERVICE AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE PONTO DRIVE AREA IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONES 3,9,13 AND 22. CASE NAME: SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVEL- OPMENT PROJECT CASE NO: EIR 99-01 WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Commission (“Commission”) and the City Council of the City of Carlsbad (“City Council”) are preparing and considering the adoption of a Redevelopment Plan for the South Carlsbad Redevelopment Project (“Plan”); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did adopt Resolution No. 4656 on October 6, 1999, approving a Preliminary Plan for the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project; and WHEREAS, the adoption of the Redevelopment Plan constitutes a project requiring environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and WHEREAS, CEQA requires that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) be prepared when a project has the potential to create significant environmental impacts; and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan does not propose any specific projects at this time nor does it propose to change any of the existing land use policies, standards and regulations, it was determined to prepare a Program EIR to discuss indirect environmental impacts associated with adoption of the Plan; and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 7th day of June, 2000, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said Plan and associated EIR; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Plan and the EIR; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A. B. C. D. FindinPs: That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. That the Final Program Environmental Impact Report consists of the Draft Environmental Impact Report, EIR 99-01, dated February, 2000, appendices, all written comments and all responses to comments-contained in the Response to Comments dated May, 2000, as amended to include the comments and documents of those testifying at the public hearings and responses thereto hereby found to be in good faith and reason by incorporating a copy of the minutes of said public hearings into the report, all on file in the Planning Department incorporated by this reference, and collectively referred to as the “Report”. That the Program Environmental Impact Report EIR 99-01, as so amended and evaluated, is recommended for acceptance and certification as the Final Environmental Impact Report and that the Final Environmental Impact Report as recommended is adequate and provides reasonable information on the project and all reasonable and feasible alternatives thereto, including no project. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission RECOMMENDS CERTIFICATION of Program Environmental Impact Report, SOUTH CAF2LSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT, EIR 99-01; RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Candidate Findings of Fact (“CEQA Findings”), attached hereto marked Exhibit “B” and incorporated by this reference; RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Statement of Overriding Considerations (“Statement”), attached hereto marked Exhibit “B” and incorporated by this reference; and RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program as amended (“Program”), attached hereto marked Exhibit “C” and incorporated by this reference; based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions. 1. The Planning Commission does hereby find that the Final Program EIR 99-01, the Candidate Findings of Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and the PC RES0 NO. 4786 -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 a 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Statement of Ovemding Considerations have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines. and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, ahalyzed and considered Final EIR 99-01, the .environmental impacts therein identified for this project; the Candidate Findings of Fact (“Findings” or “CEQA Findings”) and the Statement of Ovemding Considerations attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“Program”) attached hereto as Exhibit “C” prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of this project. The Planning Commission finds that Final EIR 99-01 reflects the independent jud-gnent of the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission, The Planning Commission does hereby RECOMMEND APPROVAL, accept as its own, incorporate as if set forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the “Candidate Findings of Fact” (Exhibit “By’). As is more fully identified and set forth in Final EIR 99-01 and in the Candidate Findings of Fact, the Planning Commission hereby finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that the mitigation measures described as feasible in the above referenced documents, are feasible, and will become binding upon the entity assigned thereby to implement same. As is also noted in the above referenced environmental documents described in the above finding number 4, each of the alternatives to the project which were identified as potentially feasible in Final EIR 99-01 are found not to be feasible since they could not meet both the objectives of the project and avoid the identified significant environmental effects through implementation of feasible mitigation measures, for the reasons set forth in said Candidate Findings of Fact. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Redevelopment Plan is designed to ensure that during project implementation the City and any other responsible parties implement the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in the Candidate Findings of Fact and the Program. Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the project which mitigate or avoid most significant effects identified in the EIR. Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects caused by the project will remain. Therefore, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad issue, pursuant to Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, a Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth in Exhibit “B”, which identifies the specific economic, social, and other considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable. The Record of Proceedings for this project consists of the following: PC RES0 NO. 4786 -3- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A. B. C. D. E. Condition: The Report, CEQA Findings, Statement and Program; All reports, applications, memoranda, maps, letters and other planni g documen prepared by the planning consultant, the project applicant, the environmental consultant, and the City of Carlsbad that are before the decisionmakers as determined by the City Clerk; All documents submitted by members of the public and public agencies in connection with the EIR thereto on the project; Minutes of all public meetings and public hearings regarding the EIR; and Matters of common knowledge to the City of Carlsbad which they consider, including but not limited to, the Carlsbad General Plan, Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance, and Local Facilities Management Plan(s), which may be found at the office of the City Clerk located at 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive and the Planning Department, located at 1635 Faraday Avenue in the custody of the City Clerk and the Planning Director. 1. The City and all other responsible parties shall implement the mitigation measures described in Exhibit C, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 7th day of June, 2000 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Compas, Commissioners Baker, L'Heureux, Nielsen, Segall, and Trigas NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Heineman ABSTAIN: CAJXLSBAD PLAN"G COMMISSION ATTEST: MICHAEL J. HO~MILYER Planning Director PC RES0 NO. 4786 -4- 1 r L A - L C - t r I E s 1c 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4787 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PLANNING COMMISSION DETERMINATION OF REDEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG PORTIONS OF CARLSBAD BOULEVARD, PONTO ROAD, AND CANNON ROAD, INCLUDING THE ENCINA POWER GENERATING PLANT, SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, OTHER PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF- WAY, AND VARIOUS INDUSTRIAL, SERVICE AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES IN THE PONTO DRIVE AREA IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONES 3,9, 13 AND 22. CASE NAME: SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVEL- OPMENT PROJECT CASE NO: PCD/GPC 00-02 WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Commission (“Commission”) and the City Council of the City of Carlsbad (“City Council”) are preparing and considering the adoption of a Redevelopment Plan for the South Carlsbad Redevelopment Project (“Plan”); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did adopt Resolution No. 4656 on October 6, 1999, approving a Preliminary Plan for the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project; and WHEREAS, Section 33346 of the California Community Redevelopment Law (“Law”) provides that before the proposed Plan is submitted to the City Council for consideration, it shall be first submitted to the Planning Commission for its report and recommendation concerning the Plan and its conformity to the City’s General Plan; and WHEREAS, Section 65402 of the Government Code provides in part: (a> “If a general plan or part thereof has been adopted, no real property shall be acquired by dedication or otherwise for street, square, park, or other public purposes, and no real property shall be disposed of, no street shall be vacated or abandoned, and no public building shall be constructed or authorized, if the adopted general plan or part thereof applies thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition or disposition, such street vacation or abandonment, or such public building or 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 structure have been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof....”; and A local agency shall not acquire real property for any of the purposes specified in paragraph (a) nor dispose of any real property, nor construct or authorize a public building or structure, in any county or city, if such county or city has adopted a general plan or part thereof is applicable thereto, until the location, purpose and extent of such acquisition, disposition, or such public building or structure have been submitted to and reported upon by the planning agency having jurisdiction, as to conformity with said adopted general plan or part thereof...”; and (b) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has received and reviewed the Plan in the form on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference as Exhibit “A”; and WHEREAS, the proposed boundaries of the Project Area (“Project Area”) incorporate territories within the jurisdiction of the City of Carlsbad General Plan; and WHEREAS, the Plan proposes land use controls, permitted uses, public uses, interim uses, and general land use controls and limitations, in a manner consistent with applicable City General Plan policies as follows: 1. Section 518 of the Plan provides that public improvements to be undertaken by the Commission are identified in the General Plan and capital improvement programs, and incorporates said documents by reference; and Section 527 of the Plan provides that all development, whether public or private, must conform to the Plan and all applicable federal, State, and local laws, including without limitation the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and all other State and local building codes, guidelines, or specific plans as they now exist or are hereafter amended; and 3. Section 528 of the Plan provides that all real property sold, leased or conveyed by the Commission, as well as property subject to Owner Participation Agreements between the Commission and property owners, shall be made subject to the provisions of the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and all other State and local building codes, guidelines, or specific plans as they now exist or are hereafter amended; and Section 601 of the Plan provides that the land uses permitted by the Plan shall be those permitted by the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and all other State and local building codes, guidelines, or specific plans as they now exist or are hereafter amended; and 5. Section 603 of the Plan provides that the street system in the Project Area shall be developed in accordance with the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and all other State and local building codes, guidelines, or specific plans as they now exist or are hereafter amended; and Section 606 of the Plan provides that any interim uses shall conform to the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and all other State and local building codes, guidelines or specific plans as they now exist or are hereafter amended; and, 2. 4. 6. PC RES0 NO. 4787 -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7. Section 607 of the Plan provides that no real property shall be developed, redeveloped, rehabilitated, or otherwise changed after the date of the adoption of the Pian except in conformance with the goals and provisions of this Plan and the regulations and requirements of the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and all other State and local building codes, guidelines, or specific plans as they now exist or are hereafter amended; and Section 607 of the Plan also provides that the type, she, height, number, and use of buildings in the Project Area will be controlled by the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and all other State and local building codes, guidelines, or specific plans as they now exist or are hereafter amended; and Section 610 of the Plan provides that the number of dwelling units in the Project Area shall be regulated by the General Plan; and Section 611 of the Plan provides that the amount of open space in the Project Area is to be the areas so designated by the General Plan, zoning ordinance, and all other state and local building codes, guidelines, or specific plans as they now exist or are hereafter amended. 8. 9. 10. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A. B. C. D. E. ... That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. The Planning Commission hereby reports, finds, and determines that the Redevelopment Plan for the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project conforms to the City of Carlsbad General Plan. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council and Commission adopt the Redevelopment Plan for the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project. The Planning Commission hereby FINDS and DETERMINES, pursuant to Section 65402 of the Government Code, that the location, purpose, and extent of any acquisition or disposition of real property for street, square, park, or other public purpose, or construction or authorization of a public building or structure by the Commission for the purpose of carrying out the Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General Plan of the City. The Planning Commission hereby authorizes and directs the officers, employees, staff, consultants, and attorneys for the Planning Commission to take any and all actions that may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Resolution or which are appropriate or desirable in the circumstances. In the event that prior to the adoption of the Plan, the Commission or City Council desire to make any minor, technical, or clarifying changes to the Plan, the Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that any such minor, technical, or clarifying changes need not be referred to it for further report and recommendation. PC RES0 NO. 4787 -3- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 This Resolution shall constitute the report and recommendation of the Planning Commission on the Redevelopment Plan to the Commission and City Council pursuant to Section 33346 of the Law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 7th day of June, 2000 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Compas, Commissioners Baker, Heineman, L'Heureux, Nielsen, Segall, and Trigas NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CAkLSBAD PLANTONG COMMISSION ATTEST: ' Planning Director PC RES0 NO. 4787 -4- Report and Recommendation of the Project Area Committee The Project Area does not include a substantial number of affordable units that could be subject to acquisition by eminent domain (there are approximately 9 residential units in the Project Area), and the Plan does not propose projects that could eliminate any affordable residential units. Therefore, no project area committee was formed. As a result, there is no report or recommendation from the project area committee. However, the Commission did make efforts to involve Project Area residents, businesses, and property owners in the Plan adoption process. These efforts included approximately 9 face-to-face meetings between CommissiorYCity staff and Cabrillo Power, the largest property owner in the Project Area. In addition, Commission staff met with several other property owners and residents regarding their concerns over the proposed Plan. On June I, 2000, staff and RSG hosted a noticed communlty workshop to present the proposed Plan and discuss issues. The June 1 workshop was attended by approximately 50 persons, including both Project Area and non-Project Area residents and property owners. Those persons interested were offered the opportunQ to obtain copies of pertinent documents. Finally, all meetings associated with the Plan adoption effort thus far, including 2 planning commission meetings, 4 City Council/Commission meetings, and the duly-noticed joint public hearing held by the City Council and Commission were open and available to the public. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. JUNE 20,2000 CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL - I I - A Statement of Conformance to the General Plan On June 7, 2000, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution determining that the draft Plan and implementation activities described therein are in conformity with the General Plan of the City, pursuant to Government Code Section 65402. A copy of the Planning Commission resolution is included in Section H of this Report. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDNELOPMENT COMMISSION SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - J 1 - The Environmental Impact Report A program environmental impact report ('EIR") for the Plan (State Clearinghouse No. 99101 106) was prepared by Culbertson, Adams, and Associates. The EIR reviewed all potential environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Plan. Topics addressed in the EIR included: Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology/Soils, HydrologyNVater Quality, Land Use/Planning, Noise, Transportatioflraffic, Public Services/Utilities/Setvice Systems, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Population and Housing, and Recreation. Additionally, the EIR addressed all other sections as required by the California Environmental Qualtty Act (CEQA). In general, the EIR concluded that because of consistency with the City's General Plan, adoption of the Plan would not result in any significant environmental impacts. The Plan may indirectly encourage and potentially expedite development in the Project Area, however, the resulting development and impacts are not anticipated to be beyond policy as set forth in the General Plan. The EIR identified no significant impacts with regard to: Land Use/Planning, Geology/Soils, TransportatioWTraffic, Public Services/Utilities/Service Systems, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Population and Housing, or Recreation. The document also added that implementation of recommendation measures, including those provided by existing General Plan policies, would not result in any significant unmitigated Project impacts with respect to: HydrologyNVater Quality, Aesthetics, Biological Resources, or Cultural Resources. Even with incorporated mitigation measures, the EIR determined that there would be indirect, significant impacts to Air Quality associated with adoption and implementation of the Plan. This is because San Diego County is already in a non-attainment condition for ozone; any project which even directly facilitates development has a non-mitigable, significant impact on Air Quality. A copy of the EIR is included under separate cover and incorporated herein by reference. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMEM. COMMISSION JUNE 20,2000 - K 1 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL Report of the County Fiscal ORicer A January 2000 report of the County fiscal officer was prepared in accordance with Section 33328 of the Redevelopment Law, using the 1999-00 equalized roll as the "base year" assessment roll for the purposes of calculating tax increment. In addition, the State Board of Equalization prepared a similar report for state- assessed nonunitary assessed values in the Project Area for 1999-00. Together, the County and State Board of Equalization report that the total Project Area secured, unsecured, and state-assessed value in 1999-00 is $305,431,594. Copies of the 1999-00 base year values reported by the County Auditor- Controller and State Board of Equalization follow this page. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDNELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - L 1 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 4 3ezr Mr. GCeyo. ?urs'im: to Section 33.323 ~tt sei. of the Health and Safety Cede, the 19S9/2@6O assessed lislues c.f railroads and the non-operatiq. con wiWy assessed values cf stats-assessed ~r=lpertl/ located within the boucdbriss af the prcposed South CarMad Csasta! Fkd~.velz~rne;lt PriJject are encigsed. '?6~se ~alues v.i.iit cmtime ic bc; valid if the prcjed.: !m;.r;(iz-izs !-miain fixed. The .:,;cfi~ance adopthg and approving the reckvelopment plan for this project become5 i<rfe:iive priar te August 23, 2COO. Since re 19, h David d. Martin Supervisor Tax Arez SerAces Section . RCDEVELGPMENT PiWJECT: South Cadsbad Coastal C!F 3F: Cariscad GL2N3.' CF- Sal: Diqc Assessed Values 199912000 Rdl- - Land Improvements -I P e rso rial /- . -I CARLSBAD REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BASE YEAR ASSESSMENT ROLL REPORT PER HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE 33328 SOUTH ‘CARLSBAD COASTAL PROJECT REVISED JANUARY 2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT BASE YEAR ASSESSMENT ROLL REPORT PER HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE 33328 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE I -PER H. S. CODE SECTION 33328, (a). THE TOTAL ASSESSED VALUATION OF ALL TAXABLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA AS SHOWN ON, THE BASE YEAR ASSESSMENT ROLL. '. TABLE Il-V * -PER H. S. CODE SECTION 33328, (b), (c), (d). THE IDENTIFICATION OF EACH TAXING AGENCY LEVYING TAXES IN THE PROJECT AREA. THE AMOUNT OF TAX REVENUE TO BE DERIVED BY EACH TAXING AGENCY FROM THE BASE YEAR ASSESSMENT ROLL FROM THE PROJECT AREA, INCLUDING STATE SUBVENTION FOR HOMEOWNERS. FOR EACH TAXING AGENCY, ITS TOTAL DEBT SERVICE TAX REVENUE FROM ALL PROPERTY WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES, WHETHER INSIDE OR OUTSIDE THE PROJECT AREA. TABLE VI -PER H. S. CODE SECTION 33328, (e). THE ESTIMATED PROJECT 1 % TAX INCREMENT AVAILABLE TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, BROKEN DOWN BY TAXING AGENCIES. TABLE VI1 -PER H. S. CODE SECTION 33328, (e). THE ESTIMATED PROJECT DEBT SERVICE TAX INCREMENT AVAILABLE TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, BROKEN DOWN BY TAXING AGENCIES. 1 2 3-6 ..- 7 (A - D) 8 (A - D) * Revenue determined using most recent data available. SECURED STATE TOTAL SECURED CARLSBAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 1999-2000 BASE ASSESSED VALUE UNSECURED GRANDTOTAL TABLE I (REVISED JANUARY 2000) $284,346,816 * $21.040.967 s305.387.783 $48,811 ** $305.436.594 HEALTH & SAFETY CODE SECTION 33328, (a). ("1 ASSESSED VALUES PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT ARE ESTIMATES BASED ON AN ONGOING STATE MANDATED PROCESS. THESE ASSESSED VALUES MAY CHANGE SIGNIFICANTLY UPON COMPLETION OF THAT PROCESS. (* "1 ESTIMATE PER COUNTY ASSESSOR TABLE II (REVISED JANUARY 2000) CARLSBAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT SECURED & UNSECURED 1% TAX REVENUE COUNTY GENERAL FUND GREATER SD CO. RES. CONSERV. CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOLS MlRA COSTA COMMUNITY COLLEGE COUNTY SCHOOLS EDUC REV AUGMENTATION FUND CARLSBAD CITY TRI CITY HOSPITAL LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER DlST MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY (CWA) $481,164 $2 $1,042,045 $286,268 $86,286 $457,165 $588,355 $60,450 $413 $42,385 $9,346 $75 $0 $163 $45 $13 $76 $92 $9 $7 $7 $1 $241,869,230 $1 1 6,281 $23,693,787 $29,697.195 $33,132,489 $236,009,302 $12,501,222 $3,330,490 $554.544 $1,064,604 $234,032 - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE SECTION 33328, (b), IC), (d). TABLE 111 (REVISED JANUARY 2000) SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT SECURED DEBT SERVICE TAX REVENUE CARLSEAD UNIFIED LEASE-1988 CARLSBAD UNlFiED LEASE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY 74,820 45,808 27,180 3.054 6,257,338,429 1,533,048 6,257,338,429 938,601 149,851,932,968 13,596,913 149,850,891,583 1,498.50a TABLE IV (REVISED JANUARY 2000) SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT UNSECURED DEBT SERVICE TAX REVENUE CARLSBAD UNIFIED LEASE-1 988 CARLSBAD UNIFIED LEASE LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY VISTA PROJECT 1 ~85702 12 7 0 1 4 1 41 6,201,963 101,969 41 6,201,963 62,430 1,087,374,912 1,522 62,415,327 855 7,796,673,514 700,827 7,796,586,653 83,424 TABLE V (REVISED JANUARY 2000) SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT SECURED & UNSECURED DEBT SERVICE TAX REVENUE CARLSBAD UNIFIED LEASE-1988 CARLSBAD UNIFIED LEASE VISTA PROJECT 19/85702 LEUCADIA COUNTY WATER COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT 74,820 12 45,808 7 0 0 0 1 27,180 4 3,054 1 1,63501 7 1,001,031 1,522 855 14,297,740 1,581,932 I- o w z a n 5 0 0 c\l W cn - > w U Y I t I- o Lu 7 0 U a 5 0 0 cu o I I- - 5 0 0 04 v) > W E Y aw 0 I I- 3 0 cn 6 0 0 P4 >. 3 z a a a n -I W v, > UJ a - Y I- o W 2 a a I- Z W a 0 2 I- o a z a I I- 3 0 v, I- o Lu U a 2 0- 0 0 cv iu U Y I I- - I- o w [I= cl- 0’ a o^ 0 0 cv UJ v, 5 w M v I- o w -3 0 U [L LI- E 0 0 cu I: I- 2 0 1 0- 0 0 6J >: U I- u W 7 0 U a I- z W 2 a 0 -1 5 W W U -1 I- C/) 0 0 n a a n a m a C/) -I cc 0 I I- 3 0 C/) > cc w cn I- m W n I- p W !$g -a mFNbr mo me ma (DN L Neighborhood Impact Report Redevelopment Law requires that a Neighborhood Impact Report (I‘NIR”) discuss the impact the Plan will have on low and moderate income persons or families in the following areas: relocation, traffic circulation, environmental quality, availability of community facilities and services, effect on school population and quality of education, property assessments and taxes, and other matters affecting the physical and social quality of the neighborhood. Additional issues that the NIR must address include: the number of dwelling units to be removed or destroyed; the number of low or moderate income persons or families expected to be displaced; the general location of housing to be rehabilitated or constructed; the number of dwelling units planned for construction or rehabilitation to house persons and families of low or moderate income; the projected means of financing the aforementioned dwelling units; and the projected timetable for meeting the Plan’s relocation, rehabilitation, and replacement housing objectives. implementation of the Project will have a beneficial impact on the Project Area and adjoining neighborhoods. In fact, the effort to proceed with redevelopment was initiated by Project Area property owners and businesses who were seeking a means to enact community development programs to enhance the character and quality of the City of Carlsbad. - Relocation At this time, the Commission does not have any plans to relocate residents or businesses in the Project Area. If relocation activities are undertaken, the Cornmission will handle those activities on a case-by-case basis, in accordance with its method of relocation, as contained in Section F of this Report. As a public agency formed under the provisions of state law, the Commission is required to adhere to the State Relocation Law (Government Code Sections 7260 through 7277) and follow the California Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Guidelines (“State Guidelines”) as established in the California Code of Regulations, Title 25, Chapter 6. Prior to commencement of any acquisition activity that may cause substantial displacement of residents, the Commission will adopt a specific relocation plan in conformance with the State Guidelines. To the extent appropriate, the Commission may supplement those provisions provided in the State Guidelines to meet particular relocation needs of a specific project. Such supplemental policies, if adopted in the Commission’s sole discretion, will not involve reduction, but instead enhancement of the relocation benefits required by State Law. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. JUNE 20,2000 CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL - M 1 - Traffic Circulation Transportation and circulation impacts resulting from the adoption and implementation of the Plan are discussed in Section 4.4 of the EIR. The Plan does not provide for the direct development of any private or public development projects that would generate traffic and impact existing levels of service of any roadways in the Project Area. However, the development of projects would indirectly generate traffic both during and after project construction, impacting existing levels of service on road segments and intersections that serve the Project both within and outside its boundaries. . The City’s General Plan will control the land use designations and intensities of the Plan; its implementation will not create locally or cumulatively significant impacts beyond what is anticipated under the General Plan. It will also not alter or intensify the General Plan’s land uses, traffic generation, levels of service, or intersection capacities. As a result, no traffic or circulation impacts were forecast in the EIR that were not considered by the General Plan EIR. The Commission, via the Plan, will adhere to policies in the circulation element of the General Plan in lessening traffic and circulation impacts. The Plan permits the Commission to construct improvements to improve traffic circulation. In the absence of the Plan, such improvements may be delayed indefinitely because of the City’s lack of financial resources in funding the improvements. Several projects related to circulation and traffic improvements are listed in the Plan and are enumerated in Section A of this Report. These improvements include, but are not limited to modifications to roadway widths, construction of curbs, gutters, street lights, and sidewalks, and installation and improvements to water lines. These projects proposed by the Commission will improve circulation, mitigate traffic deficiencies, and provide general benefits to the Project Area consistent with the circulation element of the General Plan. - Environmental Quality The EIR reviewed the impacts of the Plan, including the potential new development and public improvements that could be facilitated by the Commission. The EIR analyzed the following thirteen areas: Land Use/Planning Geology/Soils Hydrology/Water Quality Transportatioflraffic Aesthetics Noise Air Quality ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20.2000 - M 2 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT Public Services/Utilities/Sewice Systems Hazards and Hazardous Materials Population and Housing Recreation Biological Resources Cultural Resources The EIR concluded that after mitigation, indirect significant impacts may occur to air quality as associated with the adoption and implementation of the Plan. This impact is due in part since San Diego County is already in a non-attainment condition for ozone; any project which even directly facilitates development has a non-mitigable, significant impact on air quality. Because the Plan does not propose uses or intensities beyond the General Plan, adherence to adopted General Plan policies will ensure that implementation of the Plan will lessen or avoid potential impacts. Where applicable, the EIR outlines mitigation measures which will be required of future development. This will assure that the quality of the environment is maintained. During implementation of the Plan, specific redevelopment proposals may warrant further specific environmental analysis as required by the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et. seq. (“CEW). Availability of Community Facilities and Services The EIR determined that the Plan would not have a significant impact on public facilities including fire protection, police, water, wastewater, storm drain, and solid waste services. The Plan provides that any redevelopment activity is to be subject to, and consistent with, the policies set forth in the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and local codes and ordinances, as.they now exist or are hereafter amended; the General Plan incorporates policies to mitigate impacts on public services and facilities. As outlined in Section A of this Report, implementation of the Plan and its proposed projects are expected to significantly improve the City’s existing community facilities and services. The Plan will allow the Commission to utilize tax increment revenues to provide for the upgrading of existing, and construction of new, community facilities which will be of benefit to the Project Area. Efied on Schd Population and Quality of Education The Project Area is served by the Carlsbad Unified School District (“CUSD). Section 4.8.4 of the EIR describes the direct and cumulative impacts of the Plan’s implementation on area schools. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - M 3 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT According to the EIR, CUSD is currently facing overcrowded elementary, middle, and high school facilities. Implementation of the Plan could, at worst, result in further overcrowding. It is speculative to estimate or determine when and if residential development in the Ponto area may occur and the number of units that may be approved by the City. Depending upon the enrollment and capacity of the schools the impact on CUSD schools may or may not be significant. Nevertheless, since several CUSD schools serving the Project Area are currently at or over capacity, the generation of additional students would have an impact on the facilities. The EIR indicates that development fees and/or land set-asides for schools would be sufficient to fund these facilities. Redevelopment Law also provides CUSD with statutory payments from generated tax increment, irrespective of whether CUSD suffers impacts from Plan adoption. This revenue may be used for capital and operational purposes, including school facilities. Plan implementation will not result in excess development of that allowed by the City’s General Plan. Therefore, the adoption of the Plan will not cause the Project Area to generate more students than could occur in connection with development allowed in the General Plan. The City has adopted policies in the General Plan to mitigate impacts of General Plan buildout on schools; implementation of the Plan will adhere to the General Plan policies to mitigate impacts on schools. Property Taxes and Assessments The Plan calls for various methods of financing its implementation. Because redevelopment agencies do not have the constitutional authority to impose taxes, implementation of the Plan will not cause an increase in property tax rates. Rather, the principal method of financing redevelopment will be the utilization of tax increment revenues generated by the Project Area. Tax increment financing reallocates property tax revenues generated by increases in the assessed value of property in the Project Area. Although redevelopment of the Project Area will increase the assessed valuation, Project Area property owners will not experience increases in property taxes beyond those normally allowed by other state law and state constitutional provisions. - Low and Moderate Income Housing Program A. Number of Dwelling Units Housing Low and Moderate Income Households Expected to be Destroyed or Removed by the Project At this time, the Commission does not expect that implementation of the Project would cause the removal of any Project Area housing. All residential units within the Project Area are currently located in residentially designated areas; the displacement of low or moderate-income households is not anticipated. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - M 4 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT B. C. D. - E. F. Number of Persons and Families of Low and Moderate Income Expected to be Displaced by the Project As discussed above, the Commission estimates that no households of low and moderate income will be displaced by the implementation of the Plan. General Location of Replacement Low and Moderate Income Housing to be Rehabilitated, Developed and Constructed Because the Commission does not anticipate removing or demolishing any housing units in the Project Area, no replacement housing would be needed. Number of Dwelling Units Housing Persons of Low and Moderate Income Planned for Construction or Rehabilitation Other than Replacement Housing As discussed in Section E of this Report, the Project Area is projected to generate $61 million in housing fund revenues. The Commission will invest its housing fund resources into a variety of housing programs described in Section A of this Report. At this time, the Commission does not have any specific plans for construction or rehabilitation of any low and moderate income units in the Project Area. Because the majority of the Project Area-is zoned for commercial uses, the majority of this housing activity is expected to occur outside the Project Area boundaries in residentially designated areas in the City. The City Council and Commission adopted resolutions on May 16, 2000, finding that the use of housing funds outside the Project Area is of benefit to the Project. Projected Means of Financing Rehabilitation and New Construction of Housing for Low and Moderate Income Households The Commission intends to utilize not less than 20% of its tax increment revenues to finance the rehabilitation, construction, purchase, and mortgage assistance of housing for low and moderate income households, in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment Law as it now exists or may hereafter be amended. The Commission will also cooperate with the City to pool funds and resources beyond the tax increment set aside funds if it is determined to be necessary by both bodies in order to improve the City's affordable housing stock. Projected Timetable for Meeting the Plan's Relocation, Rehabilitation and Replacement Housing Objectives Implementation of the Plan should not cause the Commission to relocate or remove and thus replace, any Project Area housing. The time frame for rehabilitating units pursuant to the Plan will be subject to the availability of housing fund revenues. Rehabilitation activities will be gradually phased over the 30-year duration of the Plan. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - M 5 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT A Summary of the Commission’s Consultations with Affiected Tdng Entities and a Response to Said Entitiesy Concerns Regarding the Plan According to the San Diego County Auditor-Controller‘s office, the following 10 taxing entities levy taxes within the Project Area: Carlsbad Unified Schools City of Carlsbad County Schools County Water Authority Greater San Diego County Resource Conservation Leucadia County Water District Mira Costa Community College Municipal Water District San Diego County General Fund Tri-City Hospital - On November 4, 1999, these entities were mailed, via certified mail, the Statement of Preparation of the Redevelopment Plan. On February 16, 2000, the Preliminary Report and Draft Redevelopment Plan were transmitted via certified mail to the taxing entities. Finally, on May 17, 2000, the notice of joint public hearing was transmitted to these entities, also via certified mail, As a part of each of these three transmittals, the Commission offered to consult with the affected taxing entities pursuant to Section 33328 of Redevelopment Law. To this point, only two taxing entities have contacted the Commission regarding the proposed Plan, including representatives from Carlsbad Unified School District (“CUSDn) and Mira Costa Community College District (“Mira Costa”). On April 13, 2000, Commission staff met with CUSD officials and discussed the proposed Project. In general, CUSD staff expressed their support of the Project and only inquired whether the lack of impacts identified in the EIR on the Plan precluded CUSD from receiving the Statutory Payments described in Section E of this Report. In fact, as stated to CUSD staff at the meeting, the Commission is required by Redevelopment Law to remit the required Statutory Payments, irrespective as to whether the Project is determined to generate any impacts on the CUSD. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. JUNE 20,2000 CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL - N 1 - On June 1, 2000, staff met with the business manager from Mira Costa, who expressed concern over the fiscal impact of the Project on the district's property tax revenues. Unlike most school and community college districts, Mira Costa is a basic-aid district under the Education Code, and does not receive supplemental revenue from the state to compliment property tax revenues for operations. Commission staff concurred with Mira Costa's understanding of the basic aid funding, and stated that apart from a relatively small amount of additional tax increment paid to basic aid districts under Section 33676(b) of the Redevelopment Law, the only property tax increment revenue that Mira Costa would receive from the Project Area would come from the Statutory Payments described in Section E of this Report. With this issue addressed, no further meetings were scheduled between Commission staff and Mira Costa representatives. ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL JUNE 20,2000 - N 2 - SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT City Air Quality Consultant Report ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. JUNE 20,2000 CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO THE CIIY COUNCIL owers ngineering June 5,2000 Mr. Frank Mannen Assistant City Manager City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Subject: CommentsLtecommendations on Proposed Revisions to Air District Rule 69 Dear Mr. Mannen, Per your request, I am providing my comments and recommendations in this letter regarding the proposed revisions to District Rule 69, “Electric Generating Steam Boilers, Replacement Units and New Units.” The comments and recommendations presented in this letter are based in large part on the discussions that occurred among stakeholders during the May 1 1,2000 meeting held by the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (District) to discuss proposed changes to Rule 69. Background Rule 69 requires that all boilers sold by SDGE must meet a 0.15 Ib/MW-hr NO, limit by January 1, 200 1. Cabrillo Power LLC (Cabrillo) purchased the Encina Power Plant (Encina). from SDGE in May 1999. Cabrillo received a variance from the 0.15 Ib/MW-hr NO, limit in October 1999 after making the case that insufficient time was available to install the NO, control system (Selective Catalytic Reduction - SCR) that is necessary to meet the NO, standard. The variance was granted based on a schedule to phase in SCR over a year-and-a-half period, between February 2002 and July 2003, on the five boilers at the plant. The District is proposing to revise Rule 69 to subject Encina to an annual NO, cap of 440 tons per year (tpy) through 2004, followed by a reduction to 302 tpy from 2005 onward. The cap proposed in the revised Rule is somewhat higher than the cap described in the October 1999 variance for the 2001 through 2004 period (440 tpy versus 419 tpy), and somewhat lower for the period from 2005 onward (302 tpy versus 341 tpy). Essentially the proposed NO, cap is a slightly modified version of the cap the plant would have been subject to if SDGE had retained ownership of the plant. The 0.15 Ib/MW-hr NO, limit would be eliminated, although “high use” boilers would be required to meet the 0.15 Ib/MW-hr NO, limit by January 1, 2010. The Cabrillo representatives at the meeting repeatedly stressed that power shortages are imminent in San Diego County and would be exacerbated if the proposed revisions to Rule 69 are not adopted by the District in their current form. These representatives also indicated that if 4452 Park Boulevard. Suite 209. Sun Diego. CA 92116-1230 Phone: (619) 295-2072 Far: (619) 295-2073 Mi. Frank Mannen June 5, 2000 Page 2 of 7 Cabrillo is forced to put SCR on the boilers at Encina it would also be forced to operate these units for a considerably longer period of time to recover the high cost of the SCR. Concurrently, Cabrillo argued that the application of SCR would delay the replacement of the relatively inefficient boilers with a state-of-the-art combined cycle gas turbine power plant, also known as “repowering.” The District indicated that SCR is “cost effective” on the two larger boilers at Encina, Boilers 4 and 5, based on the Best Available Retrofit Control Technology (BARCT) control cost effectiveness calculations performed by the District. The District also indicated that the application of SCR on the smaller boilers, Boilers 1, 2, and 3, is not cost effective based on Cabriilo’s projected low usage rates for these units. Corn men ts District Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and BARCT rules for combustion units, with the one exception of utility steam generators, classify combustion units as either emergency standby, peaker or low use, or (by default) baseload. A peaking (gas turbine) unit or low use unit (industrial boiler) is defined as any unit that is operated 877 hours per year or less. A low use internal combustion engine is defined as any unit that is operated 200 hours per year or less. Any-gas turbine or boiler that is operated more than 877 hours per year is subject to the emission limits of a baseload unit. Units operating less than 877 hours per year are subject to less restrictive emission limits. The application of the 0.15 Ib/MW-hr NO, limit to all five boilers at Encina is consistent with this approach, as Cabrillo has not proposed to limit the usage of any of the five boilers at Encina to 877 hours per year or less. It is not appropriate based on the RACT and BARCT rule precedents established by the District to allow the regulated entity, in this case Cabrillo, to propose usage rates for Boilers 1, 2, and 3 that exceed 877 hour per year and concurrently determine that it is not cost effective to achieve the required emission limit due to the relatively low usage rate of the combustion units. The SCR control cost effectiveness calculations used in the District’s analysis should be revised to reflect information that became available at the May 11 meeting. The California Independent System Operator (ISO) representative in attendance at the meeting indicated that the IS0 would subsidize a significant portion of the SCR cost. The subsidy that will be provided by the IS0 needs to be included in the control cost effectiveness calculations prepared by the District. It is quite possible that SCR will be cost effective on Boilers 1, 2 and 3 at Encina when the IS0 subsidy is included in the BARCT control cost effectiveness calculations for these units. The proposed elimination of the 0.15 IbM-hr NO, limit currently applicable to the Encina boilers will result in much higher short-term (hourly, daily, monthly) NO, emission rates from these units. The reason for this is that the units will be operated primarily during periods of peak electrical demand and will be at low load or off-line at other times of the year. The IS0 iMr. Frank Mannen June 5, 2000 Page 3 of 7 Boiler 1 2 3 4 ' 5 representative at the May 11 meeting indicated that the peak electricity demand period generally occurs between June and September of each year. It is my understanding that the IS0 typically pays a premium price for electricity for twelve hours of each day, typically 9 a.m. to 9 p.rn., during periods of peak demand. The Encina boilers are apparently "must run" (IS0 definition) electric generating units that must be available during periods of peak electrical demand. MW Actual NO, Actual 12-Hour Uniform 0.15 12-Hour NO, Emissions Rating Emission Rate NO, Emissions Ib/MW-hr NO, w/SCR on All Bdilers (I b/MW-hr) (Ib) Emission Rate (Ib) 1,669 0.15 193 107 1.30 104 1.30 1,622 0.15 187 1,716 0.15 198 110 1.30 2,160 0.15 540 300 0.60 ~-.I..-"._ll-l-I ....---___.-._ __" ---- ....-.---..-.-.. ............................... ....... .... ....... ............................ .--..l....I__C._-..-.. -I.-- .......................... --....--.-I. ..._....-- - .......-...._____... I----...-....-. -..".-..-I. ............................. ...... . . .................................................................. -.-.- I.._. ............................... ...................... ..... 330 0.60 2,376 0.15 594 NO, emissions from the plant will potentially be over five times higher during peak electricity demand periods without a 0.15 Ib/MW-hr NO, limit. Boilers 4 and 5 are currently equipped with flue gas recirculation (FGR) for NO, control. Low NO, burners may be installed on these units in the near future, though it appears that this is dependent on whether the proposed revisions to Rule 69 are adopted. The NO, emission rate from Units 4 and 5 with FGR is approximately 0.60 Ib/MW-hr. Boilers 1, 2, and 3 are uncontrolled and have a NO, emission rate of 1 .O to 1.3 Ib/MW-hr. Table 1 compares the 12-hour NO, emission rate of the Encina plant operating at rated load in summertime with and without a 0.15 Ib/MW-hr NO, limit. 12-hour NO, emission totals: 9,543 1,712 As can be seen in Table 1, the uncontrolled NOx emissions from Boilers 1, 2, and 3 are the major contributors of NO, during periods of peak electrical demand. Peridos of peak electircial demand coincide with hot summer days. Ozone exceedances are most common on hot summer days, and NO, is a primary constituent of ozone formation. The 0.15 Ib/MW-hr NO, limit is clearly necessary on Boilers 1, 2, and 3 to prevent high NO, emission rates from Encina on hot summer days. Additional NO, emissions during 12-hour peak demand period with proposed revisions to Rule 69: Under the proposed revisions to Rule 69, NO, emissions from Encina will be approximately 4 tons during the 12-hour peak period. If we assume NO, emissions drop to a quarter of this level, 1 tons per 12-hour period, during the off-peak period, 24-hour NO, emissions during the peak season will be approximately 5 tons per day (tpd). Encina could operate almost 90 days in this firing mode with an annual cap of 440 tpy, the proposed cap through 2004, assuming the boilers +7,831 Ib Mr. Frank Mannen June 5, 2000 Page 4 of 7 are essentially shut down during other parts of the year. Encina could opera e almost 60 days in this firing mode with an annual cap of 302 tpy, the proposed cap from 2005 onward, assuming the boilers are essentially shut down during other parts of the year. This may in fact be a profitable mode of operation for Encina. For example, significant numbers of relatively low efficiency “limited use” power plants are currently being proposed for San Diego County to take advantage of the very high price that is paid for electricity during periods of peak electricity demand. These plants are designed to be profitable with usage rates of less than 2,000 hours per year, relying on the high price paid for electricity during periods of peak demand for their profitability. According to the California Air Resources Board (ARB) statewide emissions inventory database (CEDARS), stationary sources in San Diego County emitted 5,785 tons of NO, in 1996 (most recent complete year available). Of this total, Encina emitted 1,123 tons and South Bay emitted 1,172 tons. These two plants accounted for 40 percent of the County’s stationary source NO, emissions in 1996. Assuming the combined NO, emissions from Encina and South Bay are now 800 tpy and other stationary NO, source emission rates have remained constant since 1996, approximately 4,290 tons of NO, will be emitted from stationary sources in the County in 2000. This equates to an average daily NO, emission rate from all stationary sources in San Diego County of approximately 12 tpd. If the proposed revisions to Rule 69 are adopted, the NO, emission rate from Encina during peak demand days will be approximately 5 tpd, though it could range from 4 to 8 tpd. If the current version of Rule 69 remains in force, the NO, emission rate from Encina will be approximately 1 tpd, though it could range from 1 to 1.7 tpd. In more global terms, daily NO, emission from the stationary source population in San Diego County would be approximately 40 percent higher on peak demand summer days solely as a result of the operating flexibility granted to Cabrillo in the proposed revisions to Rule 69. The presence or lack of SCR will not have substantive financial effect on when or if Cabrillo decides to repower. The installed cost of SCR on a 100 MW boiler, the size range of Boilers 1, 2, and 3, will be in the range of $3,000,000, though it will probably be significantly less than this amount. This cost is derived from the estimated cost range of retrofit SCR installations on natural gas-fired utility boilers, S25h to $35/kw, provided on pg. 88 of the June 1998 NESCAUM report, “Status Report on NO, - Control Technologies and Cost Effectiveness for Utility Boilers.” The estimated SCR cost of $3,000,000 does not take into account that the IS0 will be subsidizing a significant component of this cost. The cost to repower the same boiler with a combined-cycle gas turbine power plant, assuming an installed cost range of $50O/kw to $l,OOO/kw, is $50,000,000 to $100,000,000. Clearly the cost of an SCR retrofit on an existing boiler is small compared to the repower investment. Mr. Frank Mannen June 5,2000 Page 5 of 7 The real driver for the repower decision will be whether the projected profitability of the repower project will be sufficiently greater than the profitability of the current operating scenario at Encina to justify the investment. The investment required to install SCR on the boilers at Encina, relative to the investment necessary to repower, will have no significant cost impact on the repower decision. The significance to the City of Carlsbad of adding SCR to the boilers is the assurance of greatly reduced NO, emission rates from Encina during peak ozone season. The main external external factors affecting the profitability of Encina will be (1) the addition of large amounts of new local power generation assets, and (2) additional bulk transmission capacity to bring power from distant sources. The Otay Mesa Power Project (5 10 MW) is currently scheduled to come on-line in 2003. Several additional “limited use” simple cycle gas turbine power projects, with a total capacity between 250 and 500 MW, are also expected to be on-line by 2003. These projects will provide significant relief to San Diego County during periods of peak demand. It is understood that an upgrade of the County’s bulk electrical transmission capacity is ongoing, which will allow significant amounts of additional power to be imported by San Diego County during periods of peak demand. - In any event, the Cabrillo representatives clearly stated at the May 11 meeting that adopting the proposed revisions to Rule 69 will speed the repower process. Cabrillo’s support of the revisions would have merit if the company concurrently commits to a timely repower schedule. Such a commitment-would have to be a component of the revised rule. Realistically the repower would have to occur during the existing variance schedule for installation of SCR on the boilers at Encina to avoid further‘relaxation of Rule 69. No repower schedule was offered. The District should not assume that relaxing Rule 69 without a repower deadline written into the revised Rule will have any other effect than greatly increasing the short-term emissions of NO, from Encina (compared to the 0.15 1bM-hr NO, limit in the existing Rule) for a very long time. Recommended NO, Control Requirements for the Encina Boilers 1. SCR should be installed on Boilers 4 and 5 to achieve the 0.15 Ib/MW-hr limit currently required. As noted earlier, the District has indicated that the use of SCR to achieve the 0.15 Ib/MW-hr NO, limit in the current version of Rule 69 is cost effective on Boilers 4 and 5. The existing variance timetable for the installation of SCR on Boilers 4 and 5, February 28, 2002 for Boiler 4 and June 30, 2002 for Boiler 5, remains valid and appropriate. Mr. Frank Mannen June 5,2000 Page 6 of 7 2. Boilers 1, 2 and 3 should be required to meet the 0.15 Ib/MW-hr NO, limit in Rule 69, following the SCR installation schedule specified in the variance. unless they are specificallv identified by Cabrillo as “low use” (5 877 hours/year) units. A daily cau (24-hour averaging time) NOX emission rate equivalent to 0.15 Ib/MW-hr over 24 hours of rated load operation is a potentiallv viable alternative NOx emission limit for Boilers 1. 2 and 3 if these units are designated as “low use” (5 877 hours/year) units. Boilers 1, 2, and 3 will be the source of the majority of NOX emissions from Encina on peak demand summer days if they remain uncontrolled. If Cabrillo agrees to a perrnit condition that specifies that these units will in fact be “low use” units, meaning I 877 houdyear, a daily cap NOX emission rate equivalent to 0.15 Ib/MW-hr over 24 hours of rated load operation is a potentially viable alternative NOX emission limit for Boilers 1, 2 and 3. This scenario assumes Boilers 1, 2, and 3 are equipped with FGR and low NOX burners (or equivalent) and operate at rated load for 12 hours or less per 24-hour period and are on hot standby during the remainder of the day. Over a 24-hour period the NOX emissions from any individual boiler will not exceed the NOX emissions from the same boiler operating at rated load continuously and equipped to meet the 0.1 Slb/MW-hr requirement. This approach would allow Cabrillo limited flexibility to carry out some “emissions balancing” over the course of a 24-hour period using (1) a mix of NOX controls less stringent than SCR, and (2) load reduction to meet the emission limit on a 24-hour basis. If Cabrillo requires more operational flexibility than the scenario described in the preceding parasraph allows, the only option is to install SCR on Boilers 1, 2 and 3. 3. The City of Carlsbad should review and comment on the SCR cost effectiveness calculations prepared bv the District to supuort the proposed revisions to Rule 69. The SCR control cost effectiveness calculations used in the District’s NO, control cost effectiveness analysis should be revised to reflect the information that became available at the May 1 1 meeting. The IS0 representative in attendance at the meeting, Mr. Ali Amirali (tel. 9 16-35 1-44x9, stated that the IS0 would subsidize a significant portion of the SCR cost. The impact of this subsidy needs to be included in the SCR cost effectiveness calculations prepared by the District. It is quite possible that SCR will be cost effective on Boilers 1, 2, and 3 at Encina when (1) the financial impact of the IS0 subsidy and (2) representative “peak electricity demand” operating scenarios are applied to the Boiler 1, 2 and 3 SCR cost effectiveness calculations. IW. Frank Mannen June 5,2000 Page 7 of 7 Please give me a call at (6 19) 295-2072 if you have any questions regarding the recommendations in this letter. Sincerely, Bill Powers, P.E. cc: Erin Letsch, Risk Manager File: Rule69 Comments .- Photo Sutvey ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP, INC. JUNE 16.2000 CARLSBAD HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION SOUTH CARLSBAD COASTAL REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL Ponlo Dr. Photo 1 - APN: 214-160-21 Example of open storage, typical of the Ponto Dr. area. This condition is among those that cause incompatibilities between residential and industrial uses. Photo 2 - APN: 214-160-28 The corroded and damaged screening on this Ponto Drive parcel is visible from adjacent residential and nonresidential parcels. Note the unpaved street and lack of drainage facilities. Photo 3 - APN: 214-160-17 Inadequate access and incompatible uses are representative of the Ponto Dr. area. This residence abuts a dirt roadway that provides access to a kennel and industrial uses. The road may be inaccessible during rainy weather. Photo 4 and 5 - APN: 214-160-29 This older industrial use is typical of the Ponto area. The property lacks screened storage area for paved parking and access to public right of way. Photo 6 - APN: 214-160-24 This photo exemplifies small lots and incompatible uses along Ponto Dr. On the left, three residences are adjacent to an upholstery shop and kennel; to the right, uses include a warehouse and storage facility. Photo 7 - APN: 214-160-11 Exposed utilities and deteriorated building materials provide a potential fire hazard to this residence structure on Ponto Drive. It appears to be used by an industrial business. Photo 8 - APN: Adiacent to 214-160-24,214-160-25, and 214-160-27 Ponto Dr. presents the following safety hazards: inadequate parking, restricted accessibility, and deficient drainage facilities. Photo 9 - APN: This photograph shows a residential property converted to a service industrial use. The front yard has been completely paved to provide a limited amount of parking and loading area. Encina Power Plant Photo 10 - APN: 210-010-36 The Encina Power Plant consists of five generation facilities; of these units, three are Obsolescence requires these units to expend twice the amount of energy to generate amount of power as their modern day counterparts. Photo 11 - APN: 210-010-36 obsolete. the same Photograph of Encina plant, with a public park in the foreground. Relocating the power plant away from the park and other environmentally sensitive areas could result if the Agency and Cabrillo can work together on constructing a smaller, replacement plant. South Carlsbad CoastalRedevelopment Project EXHIBIT 3 Owner Participation Rules Prepared for: I CarZsbad Housing and Redevelopment Commission 2965 RooseveZt Stueet, Suite B CarZsbad, CA 92008 Rosenow Spcvaceh Group. Inc 540 N Golden Circle. Surtc 305 Santa Ana. CA 92705 Phone7145JI4585 Fax 714 836 1748 E-Marl RSGlNCCADaol corn TABLE OF CONTENTS I. [$I001 PURPOSE AND INTENT 11. [$200] DEFINITIONS 111. [5300] ELIGIBILITY IV. [$400] TYPES OF PARTICIPATION V. [$500] PARTICIPATION PROCESS 1 VI. [$600] CONFLICTS AMONG POTENTIAL PARTICIPANTS VII. [$700] CONFORMING OWNERS VIII. [$SO01 OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS IX. [$900] CONTENTS OF OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS X. [$lOOO] LIMITATIONS ON ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY BY THE COMMISSION- XI. [SI 1001 PREFERENCE TO BUSINESS OCCUPANTS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA XII. [$1200] AMENDMENT OF RULES - Page 1 1 2 3 3 5 5 6 6 6 I. [S 1001 PURPOSE AND INTENT These rules are adopted pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law of the State of California (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et seq.) in order to implement the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan for the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project regarding participation by property owners and the extension of reasonable preferences to business occupants within the Project. These rules set forth the procedures governing such participation and preferences. It is the intention of the Commission to encourage and permit participation in the redevelopment of the Project Area by property owners and :to extend reasonable preferences to business occupants of real property within the boundaries of the Project Area to the maximum extent consistent with the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. f 11. [S200] DEFINITIONS As used herein, the following definitions apply: (1) “Affected Area” means area subject to acquisition by the Commission. (2) “Business Occupant” means any person. persons, corporation, association, partnership, or other entity engaged in business within the Project Area on or after the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Council. (3 1 “City” means the City of Carlsbad, California. (4) “City Council” means the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California. (5) “Commission” means the Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Commission. (6) “Long Term Business Occupant” means a tenant in real property within the Project Area who has continuously occupied and operated a business on said property for a term of at least five (5) years and who has entered into a lease with a term of at least five (5) years. (7) “Long Term Lessee” means a lessee of real property within the Project Area whose lease has a term of ten (10) years or more, with at least five (5) years remaining on such term. (8) “Owner” means any person, persons, corporation, association, partnership or other entity holding title of record to real property in the Project Area, or a Long Term Lessee or Long Term Business Occupant, on or after the date of adoption of the Redevelopment Plan by the City Council. (9) “Owner Participation Agreement” means an agreement entered into by an Owner with the Commission in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan and these Curlshud Housing onrl Rerlevelopment Commission Soritlr Crirlshrrrl Coustul Rerlevelopmerrt Project Febrriary 8,2000 1 Owner Pirrticiprrtioti Rilles rules. (1 0) "Project" means the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project. (1 1) "Project Area" means the area shown on thz Project Area Map (Exhibit A of the Redevelopment Plan) and described in the Legal Description of the Project Area Boundaries (Exhibit B of the Redevelopment Plan). (1 2) "Redevelopment Plan" means the Redevelopment Plan for the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project, as adopted by the City Council by Ordinance No. on ,2000. 111. [$300] ELIGIBILITY 8 Owners shall be eligible to participate in the redevelopment of property within the Project Area in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan. these rules. and the limitations herein described. Participation opportunities are necessarily subject to and limited by factors such as the fol I o wing: (1) The appropriateness of land uses proposed and consistency with the General Plan of the City of Carlsbad and the Redevelopment Plan; (2) - The construction, realignment, abandonment. widening, opening and/or other alteration or elimination-of public rights-of-way; (3) The feasibility of the potential participant's proposal; (4) The ability of potential participants to finance the proposed acquisition and development or rehabilitation in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan and development criteria adopted by the Commission in implementation of the Redevelopment Plan; (5) The ability and experience of potential participants to undertake and complete the proposed rehabilitation or development within a time frame consistent with the Commission's goals under the Redevelopment Plan; (6) The relative desirability of the proposed project and its ability to effectuate the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan. (7) The desirability of land assemblage in the Project in order to create efficient and marketable commercial and industrial parcels; and (8) The construction or expansion of public facilities. Curkbad Housing (itid Rrrieveloprnertt Comniissiori Solrth Carlshud Corrstirl RerIevelopment Project Febrirrrry 8, ZOO0 - 3 Owner Participrrtiorr Rilles The Commission presently contemplates that in carrying out the Redevelopment Plan. certain portions of the Project Area may be acquired by the Commission for public improvements. facilities. and utilities and for other uses and purposes in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan. Therefore, owner participation opportunities will not be available for such properties. ' IV. [$400] TYPES OF PARTICIPATION Subject to these rules and the limitations in Section 300 and this Section 400, Owners shall be given a reasonable opportunity to participate in redevelopment by: (1) Retaining all or a portion of their properties; and developing or improving such property for use in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan; I (2) Acquiring adjacent or other properties within the Project Area and developing or improving such property for use in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan; (3) Selling their properties to the Commission and purchasing other properties in the Project Area; or (4) Joining with another person or entity for the rehabilitation or development of the Owner's property and, if appropriate, other property. Participation in redevelopment may also include the Commission's buying land and improvements from Owners at fair market value and offering other parcels for purchase and rehabilitation or development by such Owners or offering an opportunity for such Owners to rehabilitate or develop property jointly with other persons or entities. .The foregoing methods of providing owner participation opportunities shall not be deemed exclusive. V. [$500] PARTICIPATION PROCESS Concurrently with a solicitation by the Commission of requests for proposals from persons or entities who do not own real property or conduct a business within the Project Area ("Outside Developers") or upon receipt by the Commission of a proposal from an Outside Developer for the redevelopment of property within the Project Area, the Commission shall notify in writing Owners within the area that might be subject to acquisition by the Commission of their reasonable opportunity to submit a proposal for the redevelopment of the Affected Area. The notification shall include: (1) An identification of the Affected Area; (2) A general description of the proposed use of the Affected Area, including any applicable use or design standards or restrictions; Crrrlsbud Hoiisitig und Redevelopmen f Contmissioti South Curlsh(rrl Cousfal Redevelopmettt Project Frbriroty 8, 2000 3 0 wit er Purticipu lion Rules (3) A statement that failure by an Owner to respond to the notification within the stated time may, in the Commission’s sole discretion. constitute a waiver of the Owner‘s right to participate. (4) ’ A description of the minimum contents of a proposal and the date by which such proposals must be submitted; and (5) A general description of the standards and criteria which the Commission \vi11 use in selecting a developer, which criteria may include, but are not limited to: A demonstration of the proposer’s financial capability to expeditiously undertake and complete development; A demonstration of the proposer’s development experience in projects of a similar nature; The extent to which the proposed project will create employment opportunities, generate new or increased sales or property taxes, or otherwise achieve the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan; Any assistance being sought from the Commission or the City for the proposed project; and A tentative schedule for the completion of the proposed project. The Commission shall consider in good faith any proposals submitted by Owners. Long Term Lessees and Long Term Business Occupants must have the written consent of the record owner of the real property in question to undertake the development or rehabilitation for which they are submitting a proposal. In evaluating such proposals, the Commission shall extend any available forms of development assistance which may be appropriate under the circumstances. Any Owner may also submit to the Cornmission a proposal for the acquisition and redevelopment or rehabilitation of real property in the Project Area at any time without solicitation of said proposal by the Commission. If the Commission does not accept the proposal of an Owner, the Commission shall notify the Owner in writing and shall explain briefly why the proposal was not accepted. The Commission may give the Owner a reasonable period of time within which to revise and resubmit the proposal in response to the Commission’s reasons for not accepting the proposal. If an Owner is selected by the Commission, the Commission may require the selected Owner to enter into an Owner Participation Agreement with the Commission as set forth below. If an Owner is not selected and the Owner is subsequently displaced, the Commission shall use its best efforts to offer the Owner a reasonable opportunity to relocate or reenter into business at another location within the Project Area. Curlsburl Hoiising und Redevelopmerrt Commission Soirtlr Curlsburl Coastal Redevelopment Project Frbriraty 8, 2000 4 Owner Purticipution Rules The Commission may, in its sole discretion, determine that an Owner’s proposal is not feasible or in the best interests of the community under the Redevelopment Plan. In such event, the Commission may select a developer from among On-ners submitting participation proposals and others invited to submit proposals. The Commission also has the discretion to select none of the proposals and, if deemed desirable, to solicit new participation or development proposals. VI. [§600] CONFLICTS AMONG POTENTIAL PARTICIPANTS Should conflicts develop among the desires of potential participants for particular sites or land uses within the Project Area, the Commission is, subject to the limitation factors described herein, authorized to establish reasonable priorities and preferences among the potential participants and to determine a solution by consideration of such factors as: (1) Length of time in neighborhood; I (2) Needs and desires of the neighborhood; (3) Accommodation of as many potential participants as possible; (4) Ability to perform; (5) Similar land use to similar land use; (6) Potential for job creation; (7) Enhancement of property tax revenues; (8) Potential for increased retail activity; f9) Consistency with specific uses desired by the Commission; and (10) Conformity with the intent and purpose of the Redevelopment Plan and these rules. VII. [$700] CONFORMING OWNERS The Project Area is large and contains many parcels of real property. The Commission may, in its sole and absolute discretion, determine that certain real property within the Project Area presently meets the requirements of the Redevelopment Plan. and the owners of such property will be permitted to remain as conforming Owners without an Owner Participation Agreement with the Commission, provided such Owners continue to operate, use. and maintain the real property within the requirements of the Redevelopment Plan. In the event that any of the conforming Owners desire to (1) construct any additional improvements or substantially alter or modify existing structures on any of the real property described above as conforming, or (2) acquire additional property within the Project Area, then, Crrrlsbrrd Hoitsing atirl Redeveliiptnetrt Conrmissioti South Crrrlshrrd Coiistril Rrrlevelopnrerrt Project Febrrirrty 8, 2000 5 Owner Porticiputiorr Rirlrs in such event. such conforming Owners may be required by the Commission to enter into an Owner Participation Agreement with the Commission. VIII. [$SO01 OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS Owners wishing to participate in redevelopment within the Project Area may be required, as a condition to participation, to enter into an Owner Agreement with the Commission if the Commission determines it is necessary to impose upon the property any of the standards, restrictions. and controls of the Redevelopment Plan. The Ageement may require the participant to join in the recordation of such documents as the Commission may require in order to ensure the property will be developed and used in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan and the Owner Participation Agreement. T 1 IX. [3900] CONTENTS OF OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS An Owner Participation Agreement shall obligate the Owner, his or her heirs, successors and assigns, and tenants to devote the property to the uses specified in the Redevelopment Plan, abide by all provisions and conditions of the Redevelopment Plan for the period of time that the Redevelopment Plan is in force and effect, and comply with all the provisions of the Owner Participation Agreement according to their terms, duration, and effect. An Owner Participation Agreement may provide that if the Owner does not comply with the terms of the Agreement, the Commission, in addition to other remedies, may acquire such property or-any interest therein by any lawful means, including eminent domain, for its fair market value as of the date of the Owner Participation Agreement, and the Commission may thereafter dispose of the property or interest so acquired in accordance with the Redevelopment Plan. An Owner Participation Agreement shall contain such other terms and conditions which. in the discretion of the Commission, may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Redevelopment Plan. X. [$I0001 LIMITATIONS ON ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY BY THE COMMISSION The Commission shall not acquire real property to be retained and developed by an Owner pursuant to a fully executed Owner Participation Agreement if the Owner fully performs under the Agreement. The Cornmission shall not acquire real property on which an existing building is to be continued on its present site under the Redevelopment Plan and in its present form and use without the consent of the Owner, unless: ( 1) Such building requires structural alteration, improvement, modernization, or rehabilitation; Crrrlsborl Hoirsirrg rrrtrl Rerleveloprnrrtt Commission Sorrtlr Crrrlsbrrrl Coastrrl Rerlevelopment Project Febrirary 8, 2000 6 Owner Porticipritiorr Rules (2) The site or lot on which the building is situated requires modification in size, shape, or use; or 1 Ciirishrid Housing and Redevelopment Conitnissioit Souili Ctrrlsbrirl Corrstirl Redevelopmeii; Project Febrirury 8, 2000 7 Owner Pur?icipirtiom Rules (3) It is necessary to impose upon such property any of the controls. limitations. restrictions, and requirements of the Redevelopment Plan. and the Owner fails or refuses to participate in redevelopment by executing an Owner Participation Agreement in accordance with the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan. XI. [$llOO] PREFERENCE TO BUSINESS OCCUPANTS WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA Whenever a Business Occupant will be displaced by Commission action from the Project Area, the Commission will, prior to such displacement, determine: (1) Whether such Business Occupant desires to relocate directly to another location within the Project Area; or 1 (2) Whether, if suitable relocation accommodations are not available within the Project Area prior to displacement, such Business Occupant desires to reenter in business within the Project Area at a later date should suitable accommodations become available. For those Business Occupants who desire to relocate directly to another Project Area location, the Commission will make reasonable efforts to assist such Business Occupants in finding accommodations at locations and rents suitable to their needs. The Commission will maintain a record of the Business Occupants who cannot or do not want to be directly relocated within the Project Area but who have stated that they desire to reenter into business in the Project Area whenever accommodations at locations and rents suitable to their needs become available. The Commission will make reasonable efforts to assist such Business Occupants in finding reentry accommodations at that later date. In order to implement the operation of this Section 1100, the Commission will provide in all participation agreements, disposition and development agreements. and other agreements, as applicable, that in the renting or leasing of premises rehabilitated or developed pursuant to such agreements the participant or developer will give reasonable preference over other potential tenants or lessees to Business Occupants who will be or who have been displaced from their places of business to lease or rent premises within the newly rehabilitated or developed facilities. The extension of reentry preferences to Business Occupants shall necessarily be subject to and limited by factors such as the following: (1) The extent to which suitable relocation or reentry accommodations exist or are rehabilitated or developed within the Project Area; (2) The extent to which suitable relocation or reentry accommodations are available to displaced Business Occupants within an acceptable time period or at rents and other terms that are acceptable to and within the financial means of such displaced Business Occupants; and (3) The requirements of the Redevelopment Plan or any design guidelines adopted Crrrlsbrrrl Housing (itid Reilevelopmenl Conimissiori Soirtli Curlshut1 Coostrrl Rerlevelopntent Project Febriruty 8, 2000 8 0 wn er Participcrtiotr Rules by the Commission pursuant to the Redevelopment Plan. Should conflicts develop among Business Occupants who seek similar preferences, the Commission is, subject to the limitation factors described herein, authorized to establish reasonable priorities and preferences among such Business Occupants and to determine a solution by consideration of such factors as: (1) Length of time in neighborhood; (2) Accommodation of as many Business Occupants as possible; (3) Appropriateness of the type of business withiq the proposed premises andor at the proposed location; (4) (5) Needs and desires of neighborhood; Feasibility of business success; and (6) Conformity with the intent'and purpose of the Redevelopment Plan and these rules. XII. [51300] AMENDMENT OF RULES These rules may be modified or amended from time to time by the Commission at any regular or duly called special meeting, provided, however, that no such amendment shall retroactively impair the rights of Owners who have executed Owner Participation Agreements with the Commission in reliance upon these rules as presently constituted. Carisbud Hotrsirtg rmi Redeveloprnent Commission Sorrtli Crrrlshuri Coustrri Rerieveioprt~errt Project Fehrirrrty 8, ,7000 9 0 wiier Purticipatiori Rules