Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout94-15 Adopting Amendment 3 to Redevelopment PlanORDINANCE NO. 94-15 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE COSTA MESA DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, California, (the "City Council") did duly pass and adopt Ordinance No. 73-44 on December 24, 1973, (the "Original Ordinance") and did thereby adopt and approve the Redevelopment Plan for the Costa Mesa Downtown Redevelopment Project (the "Redevelopment Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan was amended by the City Council by Ordinance No. 77-27 which was duly passed and adopted on July 5, 1977, Ordinance No. 80-22 which was duly passed and adopted on November 1, 1980, and Ordinance No. 86-24 which was duly passed and adopted on December 15, 1986, (hereinafter Ordinance No. 77-27, Ordinance No. 80-22, and Ordinance No. 86-24, will be referred to collectively as the "Amending Ordinances"); and WHEREAS,. the City Council is separately considering an ordinance which would amend Section 9.0 of the Plan in order to conform with the requirements of Section 33333.6 of the Community Redevelopment Law, California Health and Safety Code Sections 33000, et seq. (the "Community Redevelopment Law"); and WHEREAS, the City Council has received from the Costa Mesa Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency") the proposed Amendment No. 3 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Costa Mesa Downtown Redevelopment Project ("Amendment No. 3"), a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk at the office of the City Clerk, City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, California, together with the Agency's Report to the City Council on Amendment No. 3 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Costa Mesa Downtown Redevelopment Project (the "Report to Council") which includes a description and discussion of the proposed Amendment No. 3 which , revises the Redevelopment Plan to ensure that the provisions of the Redevelopment Plan comply with the City's General Plan as' required by Section 33331 of the Community Redevelopment Law, and allows the Agency to delegate its land_ use approval authority to certain designated officials and boards; and WHEREAS, the Planning ,Commission has submitted to the City Council its report and recommendations for approval of Amendment No. 3 and its certification that Amendment No. 3conforms to the General Plan of the City of Costa Mesa; and WHEREAS, the City Council and the Agency held a joint public hearing on October 12, 1994, concerning the adoption of Amendment No. 3 in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 77 Fair Drive, Costa Mesa, California (the "Joint Public Hearing"); and WHEREAS, notice of said Joint Public Hearing was duly and regularly published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Costa Mesa, once a week for three (3) successive weeks prior to the date of the Joint Public Hearing and a copy of said. notice and an affidavit of publication are on file with the City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa and Clerk of the Agency; and WHEREAS, copies of the. notice of the Joint Public Hearing were mailed by certified mail with return receipt requested to the last known address of each assessee, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll of the County of Orange, for each parcel of land in the Costa Mesa Downtown Redevelopment Project (the "Project Area") and to persons, firms, or corporations which have acquired property within the Project Area from the Agency at the last known address as shown on the Agency's records; and WHEREAS, copies of the notice of the Joint Public Hearing were mailed by certified mail with return receipt requested to the governing body of each taking agency which receives taxes from property in- the Project Area; and WHEREAS, , the Agency and the City Council have each independently found that Amendment No. 3 will have no significant effects on'the environment; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the Report to Council and recommendations of the Planning Commission, the report of the Agency, and Amendment No. 3, and has provided an opportunity for all persons to be heard .and has received and considered all evidence and testimony presented for or against any and all aspects of the proposed Amendment No. 3 and has made writtenfindings in response to each written objection of an affected property- owner and taxing entity filed with the City Clerk before the hour set for such Joint Public Hearing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The purpose and intent of the City Council with respect to the Project Area in connection with Amendment No. 3 is to accomplish the .following: a. To revise certain provisions of the Redevelopment Plan, including but not limited to those .Sections of the Redevelopment Plan which set forth the Development Guidelines, Neighborhood Impact, and Developments Requiring Agency Approval, in order to ensure that the Redevelopment Plan conforms to the City's General Plan as required by Section 33331 of the Community Redevelopment Law; and b. To allow the Agency to delegate its land use approval authority under the Redevelopment Plan to certain designated boards and officials; and c. To update certain factual statements in the Redevelopment Plan; all in order to allow the Agency to continue to undertake steps and previously approved projects to eliminate blight and blighting conditions and achieve its goals and objectives with the Project Area. Section 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines, based on the evidence in the record, including, but not limited to, the Agency's Report to Council on the proposed Amendment No. 3, and all documents referenced therein, and evidence and testimony received at the Joint Public Hearing, and all evidence and testimony received at the joint public hearing on the adoption of the Original Ordinance and the Amending Ordinances that: a. The Project Area was determined to be a blighted area upon the adoption of the Original Ordinance and the Amending Ordinances, to the extent required in connection therewith, the redevelopment of which is necessary to effectuate the public purposes declared in the Community Redevelopment Law. b. Amendment No. 3 will allow continued redevelopment to occur within the Project Area in conformity with the Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public health, safety, and welfare. This finding is based in part on the fact that Amendment No. 3 ensures that the Redevelopment Plan conforms to the City's General Plan as required by Section 33331 of the Community Redevelopment Law and on the Planning Commission's Report on the conformity of the Redevelopment Plan with the City's General Plan. c. The adopting and carrying -out of Amendment No. 3 is economically sound and feasible. This finding is based in part on the fact that Amendment No. 3 does not alter the potential financing resources previously approved by the City Council upon the adoption of the Original Ordinance .and the Amending Ordinances to the extent required therewith and upon" the fact that no other projects or revisions to the Redevelopment Plan are being proposed in connection with Amendment No. 3 which would affect the economic feasibility of the Redevelopment Plan. d. Amendment No. 3 conforms to the General Plan of the City of Costa Mesa, including; but not limited to, the "housing element of the General ' Plan, which substantially complies with the requirements of Article 10.6 (commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the -Government Code. This finding is based on the finding of the Planning Commission that Amendment No. 3 conforms to the General Plan for the City of Costa Mesa. e. The carrying out of Amendment No. 3 will promote the public health, safety, and welfare of the City" of Costa Mesa and will effectuate the purposes and policy of the Community Redevelopment Law. Evidence supporting this finding includes the fact that redevelopment activities under the Redevelopment Plan as amended by Amendment No. 3 will be carried out in conformance with the City's General Plan thus ensuring that uniform development occurs throughout the City as a whole. f. Amendment No. 3 does not alter the provisions of the existing Redevelopment Plan regarding the acquisition, including condemnation, of real property and the determination was made upon the adoption of the Original Ordinance and the Amending Ordinances, to the extent required therewith, concerning the necessity of the power of eminent domain to the execution of the Redevelopment Plan. The City Council and the Agency have undertaken the steps necessary to ensure that adequate provisions have been made for payment for property to be acquired as provided by law. g. Amendment No. 3 does not alter the Redevelopment Plan in such a way as to cause displacement of persons or families- from. the Project Area. Nonetheless, the Agency has a feasible method and plan for the relocation of families and persons who might be displaced temporarily or permanently from housing facilities in the. Project Area. The Agency also has a feasible method and plan for the relocation of businesses. Evidence supporting this finding includes the fact that the Agency has adopted a plan for the relocation of families, persons, and businesses displaced by Agency projects,. and upon the fact that the Redevelopment Plan provides for relocation assistance according to law, including without limitation the provisions of Sections 7260 to 7276 of the California Government Code, and the fact that such assistance, including relocation payments, .constitutes a feasible method for relocation. h. As set forth,in Section 2., subsection g., above of this ordinance, Amendment No. 3 does not alter the Redevelopment Plan in such a way as to cause displacement,.of persons or families from the Project Area, nor does Amendment No. 3 change the provisions of the existing Redevelopment Plan for the relocation of persons displaced from the Project Area. Nonetheless, the City Council reaffirms that there are or are being provided within the Project_ Area. -or within other areas not generally less desirable with regard to public utilities and public and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means,of any families and.persons who might be displaced from the Project Area, decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings equal in number to the number of and available . to the displaced families and persons and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. No person or family will be required by the Agency to move from any dwelling unit until suitable replacement housing is available. i. Amendment No. 3 does not add additional territory to the boundaries of the Project Area; however, as previously determined by the City Council, upon the adoption of the Original Ordinance and the Amending Ordinances, to the extent required therewith, all noncontiguous areas of the Project Area are either blighted or necessary for effective redevelopment and are not included for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of taxes from the area pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law without other substantial justification for their inclusion. j. Amendment No. 3 does not alter the boundaries of the Project Area. Nonetheless, the inclusion of any lands, buildings, or improvements which are not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare is necessary for the effective redevelopment of the entire area of which they are a part, and any such area was not included solely . for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenues from such.area pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law without other substantial justification for its inclusion. Evidence supporting this finding includes the fact that as set forth in the Original Ordinance and the Amending Ordinances to the extent required therewith, all properties within the Project Area boundaries were included because they were found to: be blighted or because such properties were necessary either to accomplish the objectives and benefits of the Redevelopment Plan or because of the need to impose.uniform requirements in Project Area as a whole. Thus, substantial justification, -other than obtaining the allocation of tax increment, existing for the inclusion of all the property within the Project Area. k. The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the. Project Area could not reasonably be expected to. be accomplished by private enterprise acting alone without : the aid and assistance of the Agency. Evidence supporting this finding includes the findings made by the City Council in the ' Original Ordinance and the Amending Ordinances to "the extent required therewith regarding the existence of blighting conditions in ,the Project Area and the inability of individual owners and developers' to economically remove these blighting influences without substantial public assistance. 1. The requirement _ that a project area be predominantly urbanized as defined by subdivision (b) of Section 33320.1 of the Community Redevelopment law is only applicable to a project area for which a final redevelopment plan is adopted on or after January 1, 1984, or to an area which is added to a project area by an amendment to a redevelopment plan, which amendment is adopted on or after January 1, 1984. The.Plan was adopted in 1973 and thereafter territory was added to the boundaries of, the Project area in 1977 and 1980. Amendment No. 3 does not add any.addiiional territory to the boundaries of the Project Area and thus it is not necessary to find that the -Project Area is predominantly urbanized. m. Amendment No. 3 does not alter the time limitation or the limitation on the number. of dollars to be allocated to. the Agency that are contained in the Redevelopment Plan. Nonetheless,' the limits contained within the Redevelopment Plan are reasonably related to the proposed projects to be implemented in the Project Area and to the ability of the Agency to eliminate blight within the Project Area. This finding is based upon the findings ,of the City . Council made in connection with the Original Ordinance and the Amending Ordinances to the extent required therewith. Section 3: The City Council reaffirms that permanent housing facilities will be available within three (3) years from the time occupants of the Project Area, if any, are displaced, and that pending the development of such permanent facilities, there will be available to any such displaced occupants temporary housing facilities at rents comparable to those in the City of Costa Mesa at the time of their displacement. No persons or families of low or moderate income shall be displaced from residence unless and until there are suitable housing units available and ready for occupancy by such displaced persons or families at rents comparable to those at the time of displacement. Such housing units shall be suitable to the needs of such displaced persons or families and dwellings. The Agency shall not displace any such persons or families until such housing units are available and ready for occupancy. Section 4: Any written objections to Amendment No. 3 filed with the City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa before the hour set for public hearing and all oral objections presented to the City Council at the hearing having been considered are hereby overruled. Section 5: The proposed Amendment No. 3 to the Redevelopment Plan for the Costa Mesa Downtown Redevelopment Project, the maps contained herein and such other reports as are incorporated therein by reference, a copy of which is on file in the office of the Agency and the office of the City Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa, having been duly reviewed and considered, is hereby incorporated into this Ordinance by reference and made a part hereof, as if fully set forth at length herein and as so incorporated is hereby designated and adopted as the official Redevelopment Plan for the Costa Mesa downtown Redevelopment Project area. Section 6: The City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this Ordinance to the Agency whereupon the Agency is vested with the responsibility for carrying out Amendment No. 3 and implementation of the Redevelopment Plan: Section 7: The City. Clerk is hereby directed to record with the County Recorder of Orange County a legal description of the, subject area within the Project Area and a statement that Amendment No. 3 has been approved in conformity with the Community Redevelopment- Law. edevelopment-Law. Section 8: The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a copy of the legal.description and statement to be recorded by the City Clerk'pursuant to Section 7 of this Ordinance, a copy of this Ordinance and a map or plat indicating the boundaries of the Project Area and the designation of the subject area, to the Auditor and Assessor of the County of Orange, to the governing body of each of the taxing agencies which levies taxes upon any property in the Project Area and to the State Board of Equalization. Section 9: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after the date of final passage. Section 10: If any part of this Ordinance -of the Amendment No. 3 which it approves is held to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance, or of the Amendment No. 3, and this City Council hereby, declares it would have passed the remainder of this Ordinance or approved the remainder of Amendment No. 3 if such invalid portion thereof had been deleted PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of November, 1994. ATTEST: 1. Deputy Ci Clerk of the City of Costa Mesa STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss CITY OF COSTA MESA ) Mayor of the City of Costa Mesa ROVED AS TO FORM /0 -p - CITY ATTORNEY I, MARY T. ELLIOTT,- Deputy City Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa, hereby certify that the above and foregoing Ordinance No. 94-15 was introduced and considered section by section at a Special Joint Redevelopment Agency/City Council meeting held on the 12th day of October, 1994, and thereafter passed and adopted as a whole at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 7th day of November, 1994, by the following roll call vote: GEfJ I S H rn P t1 R E y NoRn1 l3 u CFC LE k)5AYES 13U P e� 1 NOES: p 0l ')G ABSENT: t� ©pJ g IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Seal of the City of Costa Mesa this 8th day of November, 1994. Deputy Cit Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa