|
BURBANK REDEVELOPMENT AGENCYTuesday, September 21, 2004Agenda Item - 1 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this staff report is to: 1) outline recent activities involving the Magnolia Park Community Advisory Committee including the consideration of an Action Plan; and 2) consider options for filling vacancies on the Magnolia Park Community Advisory Committee.
BACKGROUND:
In October 2003, staff conducted several focus group meetings to determine the present situation and future needs for Magnolia Park as perceived by key constituencies of the community. The desired outcome was to achieve a roadmap that would lead the district through a series of steps that would allow it to fulfill its potential, developed by and for its own residents and businesses.
In January 2004, staff presented the findings of the focus groups meetings to the City Council (see Action Plan as Exhibit A). At that time, the Council directed staff to share those findings with the Community Advisory Committee and develop an Action Plan to carry out the various findings.
On that same evening, the City Council made new appointments to the Magnolia Park Community Advisory Committee (Committee). The City Council appointed 15 members to the Committee made up of area merchants, property owners and residents. The Committee provides a balanced voice for residents and merchants to help ensure vitality for area businesses, while remaining sensitive to quality-of-life issues for the residential community.
After reviewing the findings of the various focus group meetings, the Committee requested that the neighboring community be surveyed to make sure that the focus group findings do in fact reflect the views of the neighborhood. The survey was sent out to about 3,000 households, with a return of over 400 representing a 12% return rate, which is considered a very high response rate. As it turned out, the results of the survey echoed the findings of the focus groups (see Action Plan as Exhibit A).
ACTION PLAN
Based on the findings of the focus groups and the resident survey the Committee moved forward with developing an Action Plan for the district, which defined priorities, schedules and funding sources. The Committee outlined five priorities for the Magnolia Park area with the first three considered top priorities by the Committee. These priorities are outlined below as well as in the Action Plan.
1. Landscaping & Facility Upgrades � this includes items like tree trimming, bike racks, trash cans, building fa�ade improvements, and diagonal parking/streetscape enhancements. This was a result of the feedback from the Community that the overall appearance of the area could use some improvement and that the recent diagonal parking improvements, which provides additional parking and street calming improvements, received a positive response from the community.
The Public Works Department has already appropriated $250,000 ($125,000 in each FY 03-04 and 04-05) towards the diagonal parking/streetscape enhancements to improve four additional streets. In addition, bike racks are estimated to cost $20,000 which is proposed to be paid from Proposition C funds. The decorative trash cans are estimated to cost $15,000, and a fa�ade design program is estimated to cost $25,000. As will be further explained below these costs will be funded by a proposed business improvement district, if the district is ultimately approved by the businesses/owners and the City Council. All remaining elements will only involve staff time.
2. Retail Leasing - this includes facilitating the re-tenanting of commercial properties with desired retail uses and particularly restaurant uses. This process includes conducting an inventory of existing businesses and vacant properties, developing a list of desired tenants, developing a leasing packet and working directly with individual property owners and leasing agents.
This component will involve approximately $5,000 in costs associated with the creation of a leasing packet which has already been approved under the City�s economic development budget, with all remaining elements involving only staff time.
3. Parking - this includes studying the existing parking supply and developing a parking management plan that addresses customer versus employee parking, valet parking, and wayfinding signs. This also includes the implementation of a shared-use parking arrangement with the Burbank Community Church, which is proposed to include enhancements to the parking lot in exchange for the public use of the parking lot. The Committee noted that in order to aid businesses and provide for additional restaurant uses, the existing parking inventory needs to be better managed.
Staff estimates the parking improvements for the Burbank Community Church will cost approximately $250,000. The other elements will only involve staff time. Staff will return to the City Council in December 2004 with the proposed parking lot improvements and shared-use parking agreement.
In order to fund the $250,000 for the improvements, various funding sources will be redistributed and an additional $125,000 will need to be appropriated from the Agency. The Fiscal Impact Section of this report will further outline the proposed funding.
4. Promotions & Events - this includes advertising, banners, and several promotional events each year such as the �Holiday in the Park� and other new events. It is estimated that this will require an annual expenditure of $80,000 to be paid by the proposed business improvement district, if approved.
5. Maintenance � this includes general maintenance and a new sidewalk steam cleaning program. This is estimated to cost $50,000 per year to be paid by the proposed business improvement district, if approved.
The following summarizes the costs associated with the Action Plan:
COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE VACANCIES
Although the Committee continues to maintain a quorum, three of the fifteen members have resigned due to the sale or relocation of their businesses. Because all three of the Committee members who have resigned were merchant appointees, the current make up consists of 8 residents and 4 merchants (Exhibit B). Staff has outlined the following two options regarding vacancies for City Council consideration. Option 1: The Council could choose to reduce the size of the Committee from 15 to 12 members. However, this does not address the new imbalance between merchant and resident representation.
Option 2: The Council could choose to fill one or all of the vacancies by opening up a new application process. If this is the direction of the City Council, staff would recommend that the new applicants be restricted to merchants and/or property owners to create a more balanced representation.
ANALYSIS:
Due in part to the excellent response from the Magnolia Park residents, the Committee has been able to develop an Action Plan that has the potential to revitalize the commercial corridor and at the same time meet the desires of the residential neighborhood. The Committee also recognized that the City has limited resources, and that ongoing expenses such as promotions and events and additional maintenance should be items that should be undertaken by the commercial businesses and property owners.
Many capital items have already been partially or fully funded by the City and Redevelopment Agency. The only additional capital appropriation that is being requested is $125,000 in Redevelopment Agency funds for parking improvements. The Committee has unanimously agreed to study the formation of a Business Improvement District to help fund all of the remaining expenses. These include one-time expenses for enhanced trash receptacles and a fa�ade improvement design guideline manual at a total cost of $40,000. The proposed District would also include an estimated $130,000 in annual expenses for maintenance, promotions and events. Additional expenses will need to be budgeted for staffing and administration at an estimated cost of $70,000 per year. The total annual operating costs are estimated to be $200,000.
It is proposed that the City earmark $40,000 towards the costs for studying the formation of the District using already appropriated funds from the economic development budget. It should be noted that a District, if formed, may ultimately decide on a management plan that differs from the plan outlined here (however, it is anticipated that the management plan would be based on the plan outlined here).
Both the City�s General Fund and the City�s Transportation Fund (Proposition C) have been identified as funding sources for most of the capital improvements proposed in the Magnolia Park Action Plan. However, there remains an unfunded (suggested for appropriation at this time) balance of approximately $125,000, which is proposed to be funded by the Redevelopment Agency, specifically by the Golden State Redevelopment Project Fund. In order for the Redevelopment Agency to fund the remaining infrastructure (parking improvements) costs certain findings must be made in accordance with California Community Redevelopment Law, Section 33445.
Health and Safety Code Section 33445 requires that the City Council find that: 1) the use of Agency funds outside a Redevelopment Project Area is of benefit to the project area funding the improvement; 2) there is no other reasonable means of financing the improvements; 3) the redevelopment purpose served is identified; and 4) that funding the public improvements will assist in the elimination of one or more blighting conditions inside the project area or assist in providing affordable housing.
HS 33445 FINDINGS
To summarize, the Magnolia Park capital improvement projects are estimated to cost $520,000 of which, $170,000 is proposed to be funded with Agency funds. The City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board will jointly consider funding this project as outlined below in the Fiscal Impact section of this report. If approved, a Cooperation Agreement between the City and Redevelopment Agency will be executed as documentation of the joint funding.
With regard to the vacancies on the Committee, staff would recommend that the City Council request new applications to fill the three vacant merchant/property owner positions.
Consistent with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this proposed Action Plan is Categorically Exempt by Section 15306 Information Collection, which states �a study leading to an action which a public agency has not yet approved, adopted or funded�. Once approved the majority of the plan will be Categorically Exempt, any major capital projects will be brought back for further City Council consideration with necessary CEQA review.
CONCLUSIONS:
The Community Advisory Committee has spent the last six months on the development of the Action Plan based on the findings of the focus group meetings and neighborhood survey. In its final form, the Action Plan has many similar characteristics to the public/private partnership that has been fostered in Downtown Burbank. The City commits to performing certain capital improvements, while the business community with input from the neighborhood undertakes the ongoing operations of the Action Plan. It is therefore recommended that the City Council approve the Action Plan, and that the Redevelopment Agency Board appropriate $125,000 towards the parking improvements. It is also recommended that the City Council request new applications to fill the three vacancies representing merchants/property owners.
FISCAL IMPACT:
It is proposed that $125,000 be appropriated from the Golden State Redevelopment Project Area unappropriated fund balance to Account Number 301.CDD21A.700002.0000.13906 for parking improvements.
The City has $125,000 in the economic development budget, dedicated towards the Magnolia Park area. It is proposed that $80,000 will be used toward parking improvements. The remaining balance will be used as follows: $40,000 for the formation of the proposed business improvement district; and $5,000 for development of a leasing packet.
The Agency�s previously appropriated $45,000, the $80,000 from economic development budget and the City�s previous appropriation of $250,000 total $375,000 of the $500,000 needed to complete the necessary parking improvements. The Agency�s appropriation from the unappropriated fund balance in the Golden State Redevelopment Project Area of $125,000 would fill the remaining gap.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council and Redevelopment Agency Board approve the Magnolia Park Action Plan and direct staff to begin implementation of the Action Plan. It is also recommended that the Agency Board adopt the resolutions to make the findings of benefit and appropriate $125,000 for parking improvements. Lastly staff recommends that the City Council request new applications to fill the three vacant merchant/property owner positions.
EXHIBITS: A Action Plan B Magnolia Park Community Advisory Committee Membership
|