HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988/03/02 - Agenda Packet - RDAI.
0
.t
.'r +. CITY OF • • CUCAMONGA
REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY
'`¢ y
t�
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETINGS
1st and 3rd Wednesdays — 7:00 p.m.
March 2, 1988
Lions Park Community Center
9161 Base Line Road
Rancho Cucamonga
r.•
Agency Members
Dennis L Stout, chi, r....
Pamela J. Wright, vw ckw e...
Deborah N. Brown, Ap.p M..w,
Charles J. Buquet, Ap..r et..t.
Je1Gty King, At" m..a.
•s•
Lauren ?vL Wasserman, es...a.. o,, ,/s. ,r
C10� Offlm 989.1851
Lions Park 980 -1143
ti�
!;
J
Redevelopment Agency Agenda, I-
March 2, 1988 1
d
bl
A. CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call: Brown buquet Stout
_,
King _, and IErigFt
-
B. CONSENT CALENDAR
The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be
routine and non - controversial. '.hey will be acted upon by
the RDA at one time Uithout discussion. Any item may be
removed by an Agencyrember or member of the - audience for
?�
discussion.
1. Approval of Hinutas: February 3, 1988.
2. Approval to receive and file CLfrent Investment S:htdule
1
as of February 25, 1988.
C. PUBLIC HEARINGS
0. STAFF REPORTS
'
1. Review and approve a program for Redevelopment Agency
6 -
participation in the implementation for the Foothill
Specific Plan.
E. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
This is the time and place for the general public to address
the Redevelopment Agency. State law prohibits the
Redevelopment Agency from addressing any issue not
previously included an the Agenda. The Redevelopment Agency
may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent
meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per
individual.
F. ADJOURNMENT
d
bl
y
{ 2;
� ~Rig � \
It- - - - -. . -
- ��$ |:i t !! � ■ -
| !! § :!! ! ■ !, ! ■ !
\§ .
{
!
|!!!
!Vat
1-- M, II
�I�!!
|! ;!•
!ll�f
f�f�|
! ;!!!
;
� %
�
%
} /�
>�
\ \
+
cr
-1 a... Y: %:fy�YylY✓i'!ti"'t'h'�v °`: trf ",C{�":' _ . y - ��'.., r-S `:. ..:i.w,45
_.'. H.35n'n sEa 4Sa Eli nSH- ss °_ -s 3iG� aa� -s 5'a Kg
oil-
�E�pEs7�p3a7A��'��p555�� ea�aa�=5
a a3�d`2?s3 i�33�3`33?as?a3 _ #3a33�3'
� p �i � f3sa_'sa7ssifFf_'s- afas�saYSs "� fi3faa�s.,
r 's as u ssasi'assssbsasszasssssa s ssassss
f i f£ g iYgi'saa0- rz vjssys_'a- 'sa'aaa j, 'aiksgO
# # ## g 3ft#3�f3 # #f # # # # #iiii #$i ## # D #83i$
a s as u ais'a :issaansssssssasass•
rr r�rrrr�rrr- rrrrrrrrr -rr rr r'r rr
__ 3ilfiC6- s9S63Y��TIIi8Sdf33:Sl5's 66fl9flf, #,_
_ rrrrrrr v. rrrrrrr rrrrrr r � rr rr
i it c 99f f83933tiIfC's9 11,3552 4 aft, ff
- �r rrrrrr - rrrrrr- rrrr =rarr r '�rrr &rr
90S3a96Ei5 3rs_59= 535939 3 944Yi S=
p -
?� i $? � 'a3_'aisaaas�63isfpas4ia'ass � :a3isssa
z s ss n sssssaasssnszsa :saasasa s ssssass
E'p €a�ggg gg seeps � a = a
_ -- 5 9y9S -a 99Co:5'u Siz=ngnsCasE `a � &�a'aBi
' R
f
� j.
i
a
'4
a
=
a
as
sa
' R
f
� j.
| |t| Lip Lill|| 6�
I -
�' k§$7 | 0 |6 2#kq $ A" 5
|; !!'! & ;,a ■.,■ ! . i
|,: SHE. alt "N' ! ;
� � . .
§!§! § !=RMU ! ! :
| | ■� till i | |! | |I & | |
Mi ! ■! ■..,. ! !
!� ■!!
, . • | , |�' ■, || |
�. §� | - |�, ■� ■■ | ..
. ■� |.l ;; , || ■Lill§§ | §§ (
} � ■ |�.l� � |,�l,El. � §! |
■
z_
,A
Mwk
X)
I
I . . " -r
X4,
all.
In
I
I . . " -r
7
°
\
`
.
§
k
�
/
\��
s
14v"
||
!;
Il!
t!
!
!
!!!
!|
� |!
R
.
®
■
i
2
!
!
4 ;�
# ■|
�
�
h'
|
�
01,
t
«
§
�
2
\
�
§
|
|
§
■
f
!
�
{
,
\
• -®
�`
a
t.
Clj1EpEVEL0pN MENT AGENCY
I ..
a
h 2, 1988 Agency
ORTE. Marc of the Redevelopment
T0:
Chairman and Members
FROM: Jack lam, AIC ?ve
Deputy Director
Bxecuti
By: Olen Jones
Redevelopment Analyst plan for
SUBJECT: Review and•Approval of an implementation
Soulevazd.Spocific plan*
Considers review and approve an
the Foothill - Specific Plan -."
RECOIA�AENDRTION: BoulevazI Sp
Implementation Plan fns the Foothill
City Council,app oved
In September, 1987, development Agency
BRCKOROUNO'BOUlevard Specific Plan.la� which addresses the
the Foothill aced an implementation P
following has policy areas: street and
following P of certain
1 Participation in and rw tinand reconstruction in
construction intersection
identified problem areas:
2 PUDlic design treatment as a p los ive force;
Las to private
3 Elimination of physical obstac
development:
q public participation in parcel consolidation;
5 Joint public /private ventures;
6 Applicable financing programs;
7 Redevelopment program schedules logical
a+m of this report is to create a governing
The central for the development policies 9
framework involvement in the imp lemnntation of t
Redevelopment Agency Spec Plan. .%
Foothill Boulevard Sp
i
• 1 -
f i` .�fp - . ��i ALL
�ys�
.
,n
nl
i
IoW�ill Baulw•i[d Speltlo ►l+o
"
�~'�.
j�ip,lL�LLp1 ILW C0
IeW 7
.L
•f:
' RNRLYSIS: The Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan identifies
Foothill Boulevard as the most significant commercial•
corridor in the City due to its strategic location, growth
,
potential and historical identity as a center of commercial
activity.
' The essence of the Specific Plan is do facilitate development"
.. along this important corridor which will:
1 Provide high quality standards;
' 2 Unify the community imago;
3. Reflect the community heritage;
4 Strengthen commercial viability;
5 Provide a balanced mix of uses;
6. Deal effectively with traffic and safety.
TAus, proposed projects alone the corridor will be expected
to be well designed and to contribute toward achieving these
community objectives. Many areas along the corridor will be
able to achieve these results solely by mea,,s of private
development
However, the Specific Plan recognizes that some portions of
the corridor may need public participation in order to
develop properly, either because the improvements must be
coordinated and properly phased with other private
development, or because these are beyond the ability of the
private sector to build as i normal part of any one
development. Examples of these projects include:
master Storm Drains
These storm drains are a part of the City's master
planned system, and are necessary to alleviate flood
hazards and to facilitate proper development along the
corridor. Their constructic' is extremely costly, and
must be phased and coordinated with other public
improvements to ensure completion of all trenching and
excavation before construction of surface improvements.
Especially critical are areas where older, smaller
parcels require extensive reaches of drains, without
which proper development would not be possible
3,
Foothill bndward 6P"Afla Plan
IDP'a "tlm pmro
P."7
Local Storm Drains
Local drains are required in those areas where a systeld
is needed to remedy a specific problem, not necessarily
to serve a general area (as with Master Storm Drains).
Their construction is not as costly and extensive as a
Master Storm Drain, but their phasing needs to be
coordinated with other public improvement projects.
Road Nidsning And Construction
In most instances, widening of roadways to their
ultimate master- planned width occurs at the time of
development of abutting properties. However, score City -
initiated widening may necessary where traffic
conditions warrant, ant ere loss than desirable
conditions exist adjac....c to already developed -
properties. Further, in areas where street realignment
is critical to proper development, public participation
may be the necessary catalyst for economic development
and /or revitalization. Much of the minor rights -of -way
acquisition necessary for street widening can be
negotiated with the property owners in exchange for the
cost of the public improvements.
Intarsection Improvements
To support the projected traffic loads along the
corridor, several critical intersections will require
various improvements, including widening to accommodate
multiple left turn lanes, right turn lanes, full and
improved signalization, landscaping and special paving
The need for coordination of the concurrent improvement
of all four corners at each intersection, City -wide
benefit, and the major expense may require public
participation.
Activity Canter Streetscaps
The Specific Plan calls for the development of "activity
centers ", pedestrian - oriented focal points, at certain
key locations along the corridor. These create points
of interest and strengthen the identity of the corridor
by concentrating special streetscape treatment in
selected areas, both in the public right -of -way and on
private property. Because Foothill Boulevard is not a
pedestrian corridor, but a vehicular corridor, these
"activity centers" provide concentrated, pedestrian -
oriented areas which will help to reinforce commercial
activity along the Boulevard.
FOOWII aOpl""d SP,CULC PIM
1.91a .tiw Psepus
?q 4
,
It may be desirable for the City to participate in the
design and installation of these specialized streetscape
areas at the time of intersection improvements and /or
prior to actual private development. This would allow
coordination of the design and construction, and assure
' that landscape and design materials at all four corners
of a particular intersection exhibit similar character
and level of maturity.
This program would require the cooperation of property
owners, and appropriate maintenance privisiona.
Additional acquisition of property may be required at
each "activity center- to accommodate street widening.
Acadian Construction
The Specific Plnn calla for the construction of the, -
continuous landscaped median along the entire corridor
and identifies all median break locations. This median
has been identified in the City's General Plan since its
adoption. Although developing properties have, and will
continue to contribute toward the cost of the median, it
should not develop in a piecemeal fashion, but I .ld be
constructed in logical increments. Additionally, public
participation will be necessary in those areas already
developed.
Railroad Bridge Raconatrucelon /Removal
As identified in previous traffic reports, the Southern
Pacific Railroad bridge, at the west end of the
corridor, must be reconstructed in order to allow
roadway widening. In addition, the reconstruction will
permit a safer realignment of Foothill Boulevard.
Preliminary work has already begun on the bridge
reconstruction, with the final Ieconstruction to
coincide with the street improvements on Foothill
Boulevard
I -151Foothill Boulevard Reconstruction
In order to meet the future traffic requirements on
Foothill Boulevard, the reconfiguration of the
northbound onramp to the I -15 Freeway is required. In
addition, the northbound offramp must be realigned to
meet this change. This project is already identified in
the Redevelopment Plan, and its implementation has begun
as a result of prior Council /Agency actions. The
required right -of -way will be acquired in fiscal year
1988/89, with construction completed in two years.
T a Mn 9=1l ud .PPeinv pin
F , page 5
Construction costs for this project are not included in
sr ,.he Implemeu m. tation Program costs, as this project has
�,•�' already been funded through the original Redevelopment
Plan.
9
Channel Bridge Reoonstruction
The specific Plan identifies the need for the widening
n of bridges crossing Cucamonga Creek and Deer Creek,
permitting Foothill Boulevard to be widened to its
ultimate width. This work was not a part of either
�. Corps of Engineers creek project, but should be
coordinated with adjacent street improvements.
dntsy Statements
The Specific Plan identifies entries into the corridor
and proposes special monument signs and landscape„
treatments in these areas. Public participation maybe
required in the acquisition of the property required for
these entry statements, especially if the properties are
already developed.
Due to the critical nature of these projects in the
implementation of the specific Plan, it is important tLat
they occur in a logical and coordinated fashion, not
piecemeal as development occurs along the corridor. In
anticipation of `he need for a single comprehensive funding
source, the Ranc.' Redevelopment Plan was amended to include
the Foothill Boulevard corridor as a part of its project
activities. The public nature of these projects is in keeping
with the priorities established by the Agency, and qualifies
under the criteria contained in the Redevelopment Plan
Amendment No. 1. In this way, the Agency, in cooperation
with the City, can act as a catalyst to the implementation of
the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan through the funding of
certain needed public improvements. This will also meet the
objectives of the Redevelopment Plan by increasing the
economic potential of presently underutilized commercial
property, and revitalizing and improving an important
east /west circulation corridor by eliminating safety hazards.
The scope and compl9xity of the overall program require that
the Implementation Program be phased while there are many
ways to determine and structure the phases, the "activity
centers" identified in the specific Plan create natural
divisions of the corridor, and provide target areas for
construction /reconstruction activity.
r
/0 -
rwtuil aminud fpal::a PSN -F
UPleeneu:am F m c=1
Fa i
The . A
targets areas along the a corridors focused on identified
the identifidd
activity centers: 't
TARGET AREA it
vINEYARD AVE /WEST END
(Grove Avenue to Lion Street)
TARGET AREA 2:
HERMOSA AVE /ARCHIUALD AVE
(Helms Avenue to Deer Creek)
TARGET AREA 3:
HELLMANtAVENUE to Nelms Avenue) .
TARGET AREA 4:
ETIWANDA AVENUE
(I -15 Freeway to East Avenue)
!. While the particular sequence of these target areas is not
especially critical, there are certain considerations wh1c2)_,
should be given to establishing the phasing. The following-
' criteria were used to evaluate the specific target areas in
the development of the recommended phasing program:
1, public Safety issues first. Public safety
problems should receive the highest priority. While
portions of the Specific Plan are focused on the
aesthetic aspects of the corridor, prime
consideration should be given to the basic public to these
aeimprovements
tic improvements. item susuchsas storm dins,
bridge reconstruction and street - widening, while not
having significant visual impact, improve the bass,
safety aspects of the corridor.
2. Reduced redundancy and inccnvsniancs. Physical
improvements should be coordinated and timed to
avoid significant future reconstruction As an
example, it is important that the proposed projects
be phased such that the installation of storm drains
precedes street improvements, or that street -
widening precedes the installation of activity
centers
3 focused on rd fined stargettyareaso toogaffect
significant and visible change, rather than
spreading its resources and benefits thinly along
the entire corridor. The intent is to illustrate
the benefits of the program early, to provide
immediate image value for the corridor, and to
generate eatly community support for the program.
/I
0
.� TOO h&U aoulW.rd 1pdfl"?I" ,
Lwlr tlm pregru
Pq 7
'r
It should be noted that bacause of the necessary involvement
of CALTRANS in the review of the design of any work &long the
corridor, it is anticipated thnt an additional twenty —four
(24) months will to added to the construction schedule of
phase 1. and twelve (12) months will be added'to the
coastruction'schedule of each following phase `
Based on these criteria, the following phasing program is ,
recommended:
a,
PHASE f - VINEYARD AMWEST END TARGET AREA
The projects in this area include underground work for master
and local storm drains and utilities, reconstruction of two
bridges, activity center intersect.on anti streetacape,
construction of median island, and land acquisition forte
r roadway widening
This Target Area bas been selected for Pease Ono for the
following reasons:
1 Strategic location. As the west• i entry into
tha City, this target area offers t- portunity to
begin the implementation of the pr in a highly
visible location. Improversnt of itersections
at Grove Avenue, San Bernardino Ro. , and Vineyara
Avenue, as well as the reconstruction of the bridges
will en..ance the circulation of this area and
relieve traffic safety problems.
2. sanding Developiont. Pending development of the
Thomas Brothers Wtnory and the property at the
northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Grove
Aver-le, offers the opportunity to coordinate these
dovelol.ments with the goals of the Specific Plan.
3. Significant gusting Structures. Significant
existing structures in this target area include
Magic Lamp Restaurant, Sycamore Inn, and Thomas
Brothers Winery, which are identified in the
Specific ?lan as parts of "activity centers'. This
provides the opportunity to establish the "activity
center" concept early in the life of the prograL..
4 Public Improvements. While the public
improvements included in this target area are
substantial, these are comparatively less costly
than those found in other target ernes. Tn
i�
+fit
Focchtll,euulw -rd Sp"clfle P1.
: I�:wmcdtai Pm7
F.n F
=� particular, there is less storm drain work requirud
in this Target Area than the Dther three.
ri This Target Area has been further divided to specific parts.
(;. These partu, detailed below, are divided according to
'a similarity hnd proximity of projects.
s
Part T - Vineyard .Tr•t ivliv •7.,trr
The Sntersectl.on of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue is
z_ recommended as the first part of this phase for the fo- lowing
s
reasons:
1
Strategic location; high visibility.
1=
2.
No major storm drain work needed.
It
3
Pending development of the Thomas Brothers Wit t
i
site
4
No major structuzos in potential intersection r•15
s - --
of -way.
v
The projects
included in this Part should be considered
together,
in order to efficiently complete the intersection
improvements
Tho order of work should be as follows:
i.
1
Local storm drains - This storm drain primarily
serves the intersection of Vineyard Avenue and
Foothill Boulevard, and will run from Vineyard
Avenue to Cucamonga Channel. This work should be
ecmpleted prior to the construction of the "activity
•
center ".
2 Cucamonga Creek Bridge - To accommodate
projected traffic volume, it is necesbary to robaild
this bridge and widen Foothill Boulevard
3 Activity Center - As described in the Specific Plan,
this includes special paving, signalization and
widening of the intersection, street furniture,
street trees, landscaping and irrigation. This
includes work both in the public right -of -way and
within tventy -five (25) feet of the curb line. Some
land acquisition will be required in order to
accommodate full improvement of the intersection.
Llthough the "activity center" itbelf will require
no acquisition of existing structures, widening of ,
Vineyard Avenue, north of Foothill - Boulevard, to
a:commodate additional right turn lanes may require '"r'
e
t: ''�
'r< ••�
r.MM11 3 Fee Slo Pl,n,
INlmmt,ttm ProP M
i
P� f
the acquisition and demolition of existing
'r„
structures. However, actual improvement of the
intersection and "activity center" can proceed
v
withcuf this acquisition.
%$.
y
4 Median Is'_nnds - This Part includes construction of
median islands from Cucamonga Channel to Lion
Street.
e
Part 22 Grove rntr,, and Hut T'nd Arf iv+tiM t
•
This Part is recammended as the second pant of this phase for
the following reasons:
1 No ma1or storm drain needed
�.
2 Current interest by the owners of the northeast
corner of Grove Avenue and Foothil. Boulevard .to--
,
.
..
begin development offers the opportunity to create
the entry intersection statement.
PL
3 Significant structures identified in the Specific
xr
Plan provide an early opportunity to establish the
"activity center" early in the life of the program
The projects included in this Part should be considered
'•
together, in order to efficiently compicte the intersection
improvements The order of work should bu as follows:
ti1
Entry Statement /Grove Intersection - As identified
in the Specific Plan, this includes entry signing,
special paving, eignalization, and street widening.
This work includes construction Of features within
the public right-of-way as well as within twenty -
V ve (25) feet of the curb line.
2. rdn Bernardino Road Realignment - This work is
needed to complete the improvement of circulation in
the west end "activity center" It includes the
realignment and eignalization of San Bernardino
Road
3 Activity Center - An identified in the Specific
Plan, this center, located at the intersection of
San Bernardino ttoad and Foothill Boulevard, is
focused on the Sycamore Inn and MaSic Lamp
Restaurant. it will include special paving, street
-
furniture, street tress and irrigation -- all within
twenty -five (25) feet of the curb line. After the
entry intersection, this item forms a logical step
in the visual enhancement of the corridor
-
e
e
r00t11t11 eO a."d fpKtnC PIN
LPImaKlw "rm
Ps Is
L
4. Median Islands - This Part includes the construction
of median islands from Grove Avenue to San
Bernardino Road.
Part TTY - Mid RPntimn IRAn Rernard•ne Rnnd f-m Curamen vow
Channel
The segments of work listed in this Part should be considered
together in order to efficiently complete this Part of the
corridor. The order of work should be as follows:
1 Reconstruction o! Railroad Overpass - The
reconstruction of this bridge and the widening of
Foothill Boulevard is crucial to efficient traffic
circulation in this area of the corridor, and should
be completed prior to other improvements included in
this Part.
` 2. Local and Master Storm Drains - The master storm
drain identified in this phase services the entire
west end of the corridor to alleviate excessive
runoff from Red Bill. The local storm drain will
run from the railroad bridge east to Cucamonga
Channel These underqround facilities should be
completed prior cc the construction of the street
improvements.
3. Median Islands - This Part includes the construction
of median islands from San Bernardino Road to
Cucamonga Channel
4 Signalization at Median Break - Access onto Foothill
Boulevard from property west of Cucamonga Channel
will require a median break and signalization This
portion of the improvements need not be constructed
until development occurs on the north side of
Foothill in this area or roadway development
commences from the south
PHASE 1: CONSTRUCTION AND COST
Estimated time needed for construction of this Phase is
approximately eight (8) months. This does not include
preliminary design and engineering of the project, nor
CalTrans approval, which will add an estimated 24 months to
the project schedule.
Estimated Development Time: 32 months
Estimated Cost: $6,219,763
co
GH y k C
�.jr1 m � •�i� U.�i m Uw U A :"�
x _
Y m n �LJ p V w c.Yi �m i°• 'o• c
p.°
q 4 mPti m a c A
o n �py� UlS M ola MY
• ~ 0 p maC mY U O
O UO c> 0 e m e a
ti o —f1 ^i• 0 q 4 m w O a 4
u Mal y� Lr 8 9 .gi G H P co N a
u A a" q 0
�, -• N N C M•C..A O •C 0. NZA b N4
YnA N..
YgF 9 1
i O
m m m
M
It A
13 j• � � . m ."1 m � � a v Q C W
�' 6 a C J C Y • y
P 4 0 W
U v
js O E A Y L I)F
7 CO C N
u b q C C C s
mo 0 o
x u N S c
M °
fipr - -. 4
N Q N /(� • � Y
I A^ 0 000
006Tti 0. pUp1 0 l _m�i�JJ F0
O �+ m OOP 0 a Y (7 'O -0
' O q • 9 CPC
b 2 c
uc Hwy C - Q,\,
= tlLN Mac U uaYw 0 4 1 �C� 0
is I a 0 u 9 q a Y
O 4 m PC OO+ >.0 4 m _
y> n. ry—No 9 E H Y PH cc ����� �` ry
✓ >•m M R1C > 0t; Aq -
Y �v 1I r
CMC�1 q'1 .y U�rq "..•�
'1� � WI9.y.i NqY KN Db =N
N
V ivir..x• .^.Fs. . `•s�f; '1�`.y v�`.
FmtNll aoWw+N ipw�na rW ' - �
IryLemtatlm ►r"pua - -
Py 12
k
PHASE 2 - HERMO}SARGET AREACHMALD AVENUE
The projects in this Target Area include undergrouno v:: for
master and local storm drains and utilities, reco. ru =tion
of the bridge over Deer creek, "activity center- intersection
improvements and streetscapo, median island construction and
land acquisition for roadway widening.
This Target Area is recommended as Phase iI for the following
reasons:
1. Store Drain Construction - This Target Area
includes significant storm drain construction, both
master and local, which, are necessary to provide
flood protection to the following improvements.
2. Structure acquisition - Improvement of the
intersection at Archibald Avenue and Foothill
Boulevard may require acquisition of property and /or
existing structures in order to accommodate roadway
widening and "activity center" improvements.
3. Locatlon - Although the intersection of Archibald
Avenue and Foothill Boulevard is identified in the
Specific Plan as the center of the corridor, it
nevertheless does not occupy an - entry" location.
For this reason, this Target Area was selected as
Phase 2
Part i - H rmn "e Artivity rEnter
This Part is recommended first due to toe major storm drain
undergrounding work required in this area This storm drain
work is upstream from other storm drain work in this Target
Area, and should be completed first. Additionally, no major
land acquisitions are required for this "activity center"
The segments of work listed in this Part should be considered
together in order to efficiently complete this Part of the
corridor The order of work should be as follows
1 Hermosa Avenue Storm Drain - This is a major storm
drain facility which carries runoff from properties
north of Focthill Boulevard -tr. Doer Creek Channel.
This storm drain runs from dermosa Avenue east to
Deer Creek Channel, and must be constructed first.
Utilities along the north side of Foothill should be
undergrounded at the time of the insta lation of _
this storm drain
17
roaodlt rpod ffe rSNr
F i UPf®°°LatIm p,ogr m '
pW" U
2. Dear Creek Channel Eridti - In order to provide for
i the additional width of Foothill Boulen "rd required
for the projected traffic volumes, this bridge must
be rebuilt. The Hernosa Avenue storm drain should
be completed prior to the bridge reconstruction.
3. Activity Center - As identified in the Specific
Plan, the Hermosa Avenue "Activity Center" will
require special pav °ng, widening, signalization,
street furniture, street trees and irrigation. This
includes work both within the public right -of -way
and within twenty -f.ve (25) feet of the curb line.
4. Median Islands - This Part includes the construction
.;, of median islands from Ramona Avenue to Haven
Avenue.
Part 2I - Arrhlhal Lvanee Activity Canter -'
This "activity center" is recommended as the next Part of
this Phase due to the following considerations:
1. Storm Drain Construction - This "activity center"
includes the construction of major storm drain
facilities which are upstream from the Hermosa
Avenue storm drain As such, it must be completed
after the Hermosa Avenue portion
2 Property Acquisition - Significant property
acquisitions will be required at the intersnetion
of Archibald Avenue and Foothill Boulevard iu order
to implement the "activity center" at this corner.
Additionally, property acquisitions will be required
for future intersections at Helms Avenue and
Malachite Avenue.
The segments of work listed in this Part should be considered
together in order to efficiently completu this Part of the
corridor The order of work should be as follows:
1 Archibald Avenue Storm Drain - This is a major storm
drain facility which primarily is required to carry
runoff from properties north of Foothill. Running
from Archibald Avenue east to connect with the
Hermosa Avenue storm drain, it should be completed
prior to any above- ground beautification work.
2 Activity Center - As identified in the Specific
Plan, the Archibald Avenue "Activity Center" will `
require special paving, widening additional
e _ °.2S `.. ,R'
ro hill eeul�v�,d feel lla flip x,_ I '
�$ a
nml S °
= signalization, street furniture,. street' trees, and
irrigation. This includes work, both within. tha
public right -of -way and within twenty -five (25) feet
of the''.curb, line. This - activity.; center" =may
require acquisition of 'existing ;atructures located
within the identified twenty -five (25) foot setback.
4'
y
3 Malachite Intersection - Located within a large
)° block of land on the north side of Foothill
n•• Boulevard, between Archibald Avenue and Helms
Avenue, this intersection is an•integral part of the
circulation_ system and land use considerations
identified in` the Specific Plan. As determined by
- the Specific'Plan, development of this large block
is dependent upon the key,access' points, which need
to be in place at the time of, or •concurrent`' with,
development. Without these improvements, proper
development cannot occur. Improvement of--this.
intersection includes" 'street improvements and, new
signalization, and may require significant property
acquisition.
4. Median Ialands - Construction of median islands from
Helms Avenue to Ramona Avenue are included in this
Part.
PHASE 2: CONSTRUCTION AND COST
Estimated time needed for completion of this Phase is
approximately six (6) months This does not include
preliminary design and engineering of the project, nor
CalTrans approval, which will add an estimated 12 months to
the project schedule.
Estimated Development Time: 18 months
Estimated Cost: $3,538,642
.x
1.9
ANt�°Y
t
F�
o
m
CV
i
Cm
C.0 ND .0 mO
rya'
u
ti v a,
7
l'Y
}n
. G m
.0 i-Y 8[-, O b C 4
00
C
P
d
"z
-,o
C0.0
t'
040. Oti mb' mm
✓
% - -pl
"
6
11
W N m O 0 Y 0
C
d
E .=
v
OOuw O
u T 4 0 9 H T 4
N
A
K
.O
S!
Hw mp O� L.CI d
-0
m09m C> Cm
To w'U H we w4
8
O
O P
+�
>bGbC H Vd f.)u
m
ML O L
w
�^
TH Tb
u°OCM P ti tiff
C
O Q
OC O4 w >U >9
A
E m C C m
Hum 'O L ✓ m ✓>
m X L C C m U m C q
0
m
�w»95% � a
µQQl WO��(�mYJ� Q(�j�j�{{�ii88��
111
Z
S m✓ O 7 OG tom. IC d
S •'
a
pp
'991 R
m
a
N v
N
l.•�TSS11
'✓
N
_ 14
O
>. - c ..
I
�-`
o
r
o Q
to
—� 0
yT
>
a 00 ✓1
w W
��. I1
cc
a .0 GO b O
.,Ej
,I�
Q
ll m m.0'i m
0
A
C
n
.OiTgqTN
E
rui
UbCw �M O
�� "4 Ca0 T
E00
40L HCOO m H
mb
C
O^
0d y i� d,L
O
✓
Y
O4.0 m0,, ✓
✓ 4 ✓-Yu C 4m 0
tiC
u0
' 17 1 � �
m
NCO Cm� O ✓ m u
U-I
O
O.
O C - m� 01 H m
m u
ip
n T C H O7 7 N 4✓ m
4 N
_
C-0 m C tr+ m u U
40 ww=
m+
µ\
� C
p
O
.0 U✓ 41 M c Wk H
b V d'O •, V✓ m
m
N
P
w
nYti >,"m O >.m
✓0
u N .7 u u m
Blq1
C > U 4 >C H
Um
S6b1 �1
X: (04 .YmWO �I .� J
bu
I
�C d
E'
.. 4 .0
(D 4 .0 S
S
F_.'f- • 1--°1 4
i
6 �
r.
F a hill bmaw"d SM-MG Fl- _ -
7eptantatlm
e.0. if
PHASE 3 - HELLMAN AVENUE TARGET AREA
Projects is this Target Area include major storm drain
facilities and median island construction.
This Target Area is recommended as' the third phase of the
implementation program due to the timing requirements of the
construction of the Hellman Avenue storm drain. This major
storm drain facility will run from just north of San
Bernardino Road to Cucamonga Channel, south of 6th Street.
In order to achieve cost savings on this system, Engineering_
Division has recommended that the storm drain system further
north on Hellman Avenue be constrricted. This will allow a
reduction in size of this southerly system.
The scope of work contained in this Phase is such that all
the work can be performed at one time. The segment$ of wor)w -••
listed in this Phase should be considered together in order
to efficiently complete this Phase of the corridor. The
order of work should be as follows:
1. Hellman Storm Drain -.This feature is a major part
of the drainage facilities north and south of the
Foothill corridor.
7 Hedian Islands - Construction of median islands from
Lion Avenue to Helms Avenue is included in this
'base.
PHASE 3: CONSTRUCTION AND COST
Estimated time needed for completion of this Phase is
approximately four (4) months. this does not include
preliminary design and engineering of the project, nor
CalTrans approval, which will add an estimated 12 months to
the project schedule.
Estimated Development Time: 16 months
Estimated Cost: $3,540,000
t$,h
M�
All
13=
IT
ri
z
O
g6j
A2-
Oti
N 0
CN
E c
m
4
FO 0
M�
All
13=
IT
ri
z
O
g6j
A2-
T.0111 a Iwud 1ppelflo Pl,n
eryltsR,clm Ptegta* °
PHASE 4 - ET/WANDA AVENUE TARGET AREA
Projects in this Target Area include regional and master
iP storm drain work, - activity center- intersection and
streetecape construction, and median island construction.
This Target Area is recommended as Phase 4 due primarily to
the regional Etiwanda /San Sevaine Diversion Channel flood
control facilities which are required prior to any
development of the east end of the corridor. Much of the
channel is outside the City limits, and will necessitate
careful coordination s,th the City of Fontana, County of San
Bernardino, and other affected agencies. All major storm
drain facilities in this Target Area drain into the regional
channel, and are dependent upon the completion of this
facility.
The Etiwanda /San Sevaine Regional Diversion Channel is not a
part of current regional project work Funding for this
project has not been developed, and due to the necessary
coordination with other public agencies, will not be
availaLle in the near future Beat estimates indicate that
financing for the project will not be available before *.
The segments of work listed in this Phase should be
considered together in order to efficiently complete this
Part of t• corridor. The order of work should be as
follows:
1 Etiwanda /San Sevaine Regional Flood Control
Facilities - Although not a part of the Foothill
Specific Plan, there facilities must be completed
prior +- the other identified projects. Interim
flood control measures are being studied
2 Foothill Boulevard /East Avenue Storm Drain - This
storm drain facility will run from Etiwanda Avenue
east to the Etiwanda /San Sevaine regional facility.
Much of the development potential of this target
area is dependent upon the flood control systems
being developed. Overhead utilities on the north
side of Foothill Boulevard and south on Etiwanda
Avenue should be undergrounded at the time of the
installation of these facilities
3 Entry Intersection at East Avenue - As identified•in
the Specific Plan, this includes entry signing,
special paving, signalization, and street widening.
This work includes construction of features within
7
� „ y •,eh +"11%litf�,��,13; " „_.,_ _ - „t „ryK, - -i'.
r” -tl/11 awlr,ard sµAflc Fl” ` - t'•
lwl" Atlm Fr rn
?p 19
the public right -of -way as well as within twenty- `
five (25) feet of the curb line.
4. Etiwanda Avenue "Activity Center" - As identified in
the Specific Plan, the Etiwanda Avenue "Activity
Center" will •require special paving, widening,
signalization, street furniture, street trees and
irrigation. This includes work both within .thu
public right -of -way and irithin twenty -five (25) feet
of the curb line. This -activity center" may
require acquisition of existing structures located
within the identified twenty -five (25) foot setback.
' S ))odian Islands - Construction of median islands from
East Avenue to to the 1 -15 Freeway is included in
this Phase.
PHASE 4:CONST/IUCTION AND COST
Estimated time needed for completion of this Ph,Se is
approximately six (6) months. This does not include
preliminary design and engineering of the project, nor
CalTrans approval, which will add an estimated 12 months to
the project schedule Additionally, work in this phase is
dependent upon the completion of the Etiwanda /Sen Sevaine
Diversion Channel. Best estimates of the timing of this
regional project incicate that start of the project is at
least seven (7) years away Therefore, the t!.ming of Phase 4
is delayed at least seven (7) years.
Estimated oevelopmsnt Time: 10 months
Estimated Cost: $2,955,51P
f'
.r0 0
c7
Oil 'D.
xz.
t
i
M 1
0 C
T
N
0 0 4
H C
a�
M O
�• M
C
T -1
TD
i MU
0 TV
m
M
N
O.
mq
'00014
NLN
mG
wUm
xw•..
N b
C
m
ma
O
0.0
G'
4
Z
H
tyA
a+
Q
N
m
�O
ON✓012
t.
+p1 W=
r
U Y
M
2
a
M
0, mM C�
-0
m 1 C
W 1
T
C C
>
> C
-I O M 1•
E
0 a +1
U>
b>I
N O.w •
O
im
0-ILN1O•
-U• U
0
W
C
•Up L
4a C
O 0 W, u
m
0 0. m�p
>
a C a
W
0,;
W E 00
O
YOU •-01
m
U, mC
d�+A
m
W
u C>
U m C 7•+ 1
0� V P.
i
m
9ma am
.-1
M 4J
C E •a a H
ti
Or
>
W> M
0
1
at.a. d N110
O
c O0
fl
1•f C
f'
.r0 0
c7
Oil 'D.
xz.
t
i
M 1
0 C
N
0 0 4
H C
a�
M O
�• M
C
T -1
TD
i MU
0 TV
m
M
N
O.
mq
'00014
NLN
m Mti
wUm
xw•..
N b
r
m
f'
.r0 0
c7
Oil 'D.
xz.
t
N .0
N
a�
Z
m
iu
m °'
A
N
N b
N
O Q
ma
O
0.0
M m
4
Z
H
tyA
a+
Q
N
m
�O
W
l0a1
t.
r
U Y
M
a
M
T
4
W 1
T
C C
>
> C
q m
U>
b>I
G 4
S Pl
N .0
PoocElll Sa,l�v�rd Seel lla �flm � � ' T
Isp3mrK�tlm Progrm . ; �''`•". �•�Y` °.'
P� 21 Na
PHASING ALTERNATIVES
As an alternative to the Phasing Program outlined above, it
is posrible to combine the storm drain wort from Target Areas
2 and 3 as an initial phase. These 'projects could be
designed and receive approval from CalTrans in 'a ons (1) year
period. This would allow construction of improvements to•'
being after twelve (12) months, rather than twenty -four (24)
months
y Additionally, the other above - ground improvements, such as
the ^activity centers ", medians, etc., cold be designed and
approved by CalTrans during this period Thus, upon the
completion of the etorm drain work, the other projects would
be designed and approved, ready for installation. Subsequent
phases would follow as outlined above. "
This approach, while allowing for an earlier start date, does
not provide the immediate visual. impact of, the proposed
Phasing Program. All of the, initial work would^ be
S' underground, and may not generate, as much community' interest
') for the program Additionally, there is no time savings in
the overall program.
POTENTIAL PARCEL CONSOLIDATION OPPORTUNITIES
ALONG THE CORRIDOR
Existing multiple ownerships and fragmented parcel
configurations compound problems identified In the Specific
Plan. In order to further promote public safety along
Foothill Boulevard and enhance the economic viability of
future redevelopment of key portions of the corridor, a
parcel consolidation program may be d. LLal.le. Several
general areas along the corridor have bt.,: 4de..4fied by the
Planning Division as candidates for parce- c- n.solidation. A
parcel consolidation program could be considered for any of
the following reasons:
1 Parcel contigurations do not provide adequate access
which is necessary for safe traffic movement.
Multiple parcels, each with its own access to
Foothill Boulevard, increase safety hazards anti
hinder proper traffic movement" This, in turn,
creates a sense of ovarcrowded streets, negatively
impacting the public's perception of the corridor,
and making the commerciel services less attractive
to shop
wllY
nWhI11 Paulw.H - spun. P1N
LP;—_ftlm rM.
P� II
2 The parcels -in ,question are developed with small
non - conforming uses which are in conflict with-the
goals identified in the Specific Flan. However, the
economic value of the existing use makes It unlikely -
that the private 'sector would acquire these to be ,
consolidated into a larger parcel for development.
3. The parcels in question are considered to be crucial
to the overall proper development of a larger block
of land in order to create an uconorically sound
project.
4. The site and configuration of the parcels will not
allow for development in keeping with the goals of
the Specific Plan. Oncvordinated and .fragmented
development will further dilute the architectural
character of the corridor, and will not provide tba
pedastrian- oriented commercial centers identified'ih _
the Specific Plan
Areas which are potential candidates for a parcel
consolidation program are described below, and identified on
Exhibit "A" While these have been specifically identified
as areas in which a parcel consolidation program might be
implemented, this program is depenlant upon policy
determinations by the Agency As a policy consideration, the
Agency should determine whether acquisition and consolidation
of identified parcels should be part of an Agency program, or
should be considered on a case -by -case basis as the
interest /opportunity arises.
Inclusion of the following areas in the implementation
program does not guarantee Agency participation, nor does it
preclude Agency participation in other areas along Foothill
Boulevard, should the Agency determine such ti be of benefit
Approximate.y 8 4 acres on the scuth aide of
Foothill Boulevard, bounded by San Bernardino Road,
Grove Avenue and Foothill Boulevard, and .7 acres on
the north side of Foothill Boulevard Althn -.n
zoned for development of office space, this area 1s
currently, developed with small substandard
residential lots along Grove Avenue and San
Bernardino Road, and small, shallow commercial lots
along Foothill Boulevard The configuration and
,size of these parcels is not conducive to the
coozdlnaz.:d development of this block in conjunction
with the entry portal at Grove Avenue and Foothill
Boulevard. Multiple accesses from the individual
27 k
Iaat 111 o lmwud !efelfia Plan
Lplamtltfm Pnq[a
Prp b
properties has a negative impact on proper traffic
movement, creating congestion and safety hazards,
Parcel,consolidation will also help to eliminate the
non - conforming uses in this area tPA create parcels
of a size conducive to office development.
Consolidation of lots in this area will also assist
in the development of the "activity center" and the
visual elements of the City's western entry portal.,
Approximately 8.5 acres bounded by San Bernardino
Road, Foothill Boulevard, Vineyard Avenue and San
Diego Road. This area consists of multiple
ownerships adjacent to a designated "activity
center" in need of revitalization. Parcel
consolidation in this area would significantly aid
in its revitalization by eliminating the substandard
parcels and allowing for unified development.
Multiple ownerships preclude the proper development
of the area in a manner consistent with the
designated "activity center*. The architectural
style of existing structures are i,l conflict with
the character of a significant historical Ian mark
on an adjacent corner, and weaken the "activity
center ". In order for proper d"alopment of the
total " activit" center" to occur, parcel
consolidation cou -d be considered in this area.
Approximately 21 acres along the north aide of
Foothill Boulevard, bounded by San Bernardino Road,
Foothill Boulevard, Klusman Avenue and Hellman
Avenue. Also included in this consolidation area
are 3 5 acres bounded by Estacia Avenue, Foothill
Boulevard, Archibald Avenue and Klusman Avenue
These areas are typified by narrow, substandard lots
with older, single - family residences
Existing fragmented pir_el configuration promotes
multiple, conflicting access points along Foothill
Boulevard, disrupting traffic flew by causino
increased side friction along the c-)rrido:
Additionally, the Specific Plan calls for the
elimination of direct vehicular access from Foothill
Boulevard north to San Bernardino Road +.t this area
The Specific Plan also requires a Circulation Master
Plan for any developannt of this area, detailing the
circulation configuration and improvements
This large acreage is one of tie prime commercial
opportunities along Foothill Boulevard. However, it
_ .tin
rY
ra"thill amlevard rpedfla Plow
d
lgde nlm rmrb
-
Pp, 21
�a
'
is unlikely that the current multiple ownerships
..
will be able to provide the coordinated effort
Su'+�
necessary to develop this important area to its
-�
highest and best use Master planning of the site
{
will require the elimination of the multiple
ownerships in order for proper development to occur.
Several of the smaller parcels are "keyn.,parcels in
development of proper circulation systems for this
large block. Additionally, elimination of the non -
conforming uses will provide opportunities for more
Fn +
economically viable development.
6 Approximately 4.8 acres at the Northwest corner of
Foothill Boulevard and Hermosa Avenue, and 2.6 acres
along the north side of Foothill Boulevard, 900 feet
vest of Ramona. This area is characterized by
medium -size lots of multiple ownerships which need
to be consolidated in order to aid in the -_
redevelopment of this area.
'
Multiple ownerships in the area hinder proper
development of circulation systems Each separately
-'
owned parcel requires its own accts$ point '.o
+
Foothill Boulevard, thus creating additional traffic
a
problems. Further, the size snd configuration of
a�
existing parcels will not allow for the construction
of the special streetscape improvements identified
in the Specific Plan. Redevelopment of the area in
conjunction with the "activity center" will require
the elimination of the non - conforming uses, in order
that a cohesive design statement may be created
5 Approximately 2.6 acres at the Northwest corner of
Foothill Boulevard and Etivanda Avenue. This area
is characterized by multiple ownerships .hick could
hinder the development cf the proposes "activity
center ". Multiple owners %ips in the area hinder
proper development of circ lotion s ,(stems Each
separately owned parcel requires '_a own sccess
point to Foothill Bouletard, thus creating
additional traffic problems Fur er, the size and
configuration of existing parcels will not allow for
the construction of the st "cial streetscape
improvements identified in the specific Plan as the
central part of an -activity <e ter ".
It is important to note that due to the necessity of
the construction of the regional flood control
improvements prior to development in this area, it
is estimated that construction cannot begin for
approximately seven to ten years. tior this reason,
.,
a
d {ii
Poat4111 ft4wara tpttUla f1m
ipl®uit+tim Pm .
T." K
a paruol consolidaticn progre'n in this Target Area
is impractical et this time. Parcel consolidation
opportunities should be examined again following
completion of the regional flood control facilities V
CONSTRAINTS TO PARCEL CONSOLIDAMW
Proper redevelopment of these areas, as identified in the
Specific Plar., may require the consolidation of tha:ee parcels
And a coordinated development plan. However, acqui;ti_ ion by
the Agency, is a time- consuming, expensive and st.notimes
controversial process.
Beyond the cost of the property and improvements, wW nh mueE-
be determined by a certified appraisal, in caees where the
acquisition includes more than vacant property the Agenuy
must pay relocation costs for affected businesses and
residents For each residential owner - occupant, the cost o"
relocation is $15,000. For relocation of residential
rentits, the cost is $4,500. For business relocations, the
Agency is liable for all costs of relocation, or an -in-lieu-
payment of not ,ess than $2,500, and not more than $10,000,
at the owner's choice
The Agency may also be required to compensate the business
owners for "loss of goodwill ". Tits could include
compensation for the amount of time the owner is out of
business wnile relocating, the diffie.. t} in establishing
clientele in the new location, and loss of revenue dve to the
relocation This is normally a negotiated fee.
Additionally, any property acquired by the Agency is exempt
from proporty tax for as long as the Agency oins it, thus
decreasing the amount of tax increment received by the
Agency This means that any acquisition by the 4gency should
be in conjunction with a de velopment agreement, under the
terms of which the Agency acquires the property and
immediately resells it to a redeveloper "Land banking ", the
process of acquiring property and holding it until a
developer is found, requirns substantial investment by the
Agency (acquisition, relocation, demolition, etc), usually
with minimal retur,i. That is why it is prudent to acquire
property only when there has been a "Exclusive Right to
Negotiate" entered into with a redeveloper.
Further, the acquisition of property through the use of bond
proceeds is strictly limited under the Tax Reform Act of
96
Fo hlll aoul.v.rd ap.Clue elm
XMI . t4tim P,a!rm
Page 24
1986, which makes this type of participation by the Agency
less attractive to developers. Such land purchases would
require the ur.a of the Agency's unrestricted funds. Because
these funds are vary limited, careful consideration should be
given to the uoe of these funds. Since the use of these
funds is not restricted by Tax Reform, they are the mbat
valuable assets which the Agency has for use in its progrars.
PUBLIC /PRIVATE ENTERPRISE ROLES
As an alternative to a parcel consolidation program, the
Agency could offor specific assistance in the construction of
public improvements in these identified aroas in exchange for
a developer consolidating the parcels Such assistance could
include the following:
Taxable Bonds: Due to the restrictive nature of the
Tax Reform Act of 1986, tax - exempt bends can no longer -
be used for traditional redevelopment activities like
land c1st write- downe, where 'n Agency would purchase
the land required tea n development and then sell it to
a redeveloper for a lcva- price. However, these types
of activities can st-11 be funded through the sale of a
taxable bond
Fee Rebates: Ietate o1 Ctt/ ta.sa can be an incentive
used to encuutage development ca a particular site. It
would be possible, for exemp,e to offer tho rebate of
fees required foe ftlil.g d parc-1 map in exchange for a
redeveloper acquir.nq and consolidating parcel along
the corridor Other f -vi could be rebated as well, to
be determined 7l, a :ase -by -case basis as the
opportunity arose
Direct Incentives: Direct incentives to developers can
be made in the form of cash incentives, property tax
rebates, sales tax rebates, or any combination of these
three
It is possible to use the Agency's available
unrestricted cash to provide an incentive to a
redeveloper This is the other possible means of
financing a land cost write -down or similar activity
which is no longer fundable through tax - exempt means
However, because of the limited nature of these funds,
it is unlikely that slfficient unencumbered money will
be available during the life of the Implementation Plan
to provide a substantial enough incentive.
Limited rebates of property tax or sales tax are
basically structured the same. However, sales tax
31
.d
Yo 1411 0.4"'cl Sp inn Pl,n
tmly .Atlm tnq,o
P7 71
rebates should be considered only for developments
which will yield a substantial increase in tax
increment to the Agency. As such, this type of
agreement should not be considered for projects outside
the Redevelopment Pr_ject Area (anything west of
Vineyard Avenue).
Additionally, a limit to Agency participation in this
manner should be established Typically,, as used by'
other redevelopment agencies, these agreements are
limited to an amount equal to the rebate of 3 -5 years
`,. of tax increment produced by the project. This rebate
should be paid only upon completion of the project and
is receipt by the Agency of the new tax increment or sales
tax produced by the project. Determination of this
amount should examine whether the rebate includes the
full amount, or an amount,equal to 39♦ of tax increment
receipts, the amount which is not encumbered.-.by-
outstanding cooperative /pass - through agreements.
Salon tax rebates should be focused on developments
.. which include a high- sa lea - tax - producing user. This
type of agreement could include a formula for
determining the amount of the rebate, i.e. 60% of the
sales tax generated by the business for the first 5
years, etc This formula can have any number of
variations, but should be related directly to the
projections of revenue to the City
The amount of any direct participation by tA-
Agency /City in a project should be based either on
unusual development costs or the amount of benefit to
the Agency /City. As an example, consolidation of a
number of small parcels adds additional cost ti a
project, since small acreage normally carries a higher
cost per square foot than larger acreage Thus, for a
development which involves the consolidation of fifteen
small parcels, the additional cost of the acquisition
of these parcels could make the project financially
infeasible Agency participation i., such a case may be
warranted
It is also possible that the Agency /City may wish to
assist a particular developer /user /owner in order to
ensure his participation in the revitalization of the
Foothill Boulevard corridor Such an - anchor- may be
the key to stimulating further commercial development
along the corridor Because of the many variables
associated with any one project proposal, a policy
decision by the Agency Board o determine the extent
and manner of Agency participation necessarily requires
3;L
V
` 4
t
9
t.
<..vc..a 3
._ ♦+ _ S. _ ��� y�� `�.'�,YIY Y Sly.. -�:, d \ - � "riy *. -• �7
+C �
~
r shill DMAOVi spmitio VIM
rp 22
a caso -by -case evaluation only under generally accepted
�.�
industry standards and the special circumstances, at
x
hand
T
4. Existing Businesses: Current ly,,,' the_ Agency has in -
.*
place a program to assist property owners In the
upgrading \of the facade of their buildinga. T .`
program offers to loan •80% of the cost 'of certain
qualified improvements, up to 550,000.
Because many of the needs ,of exietinq,bvsinessea do not
fall into the categories established. under thin.
,
�(A
;t
program /'further investigation of business needs should"
!,a undertaken.'- A aui-vey of existing'buainesses along
Foothill Boulevard should be taken to "deteimine their
a ,
needs, and how the Agency might beat'. asaist them:
'
-
It is possible that the existing program could - „bey,• ,.
expanded to fund the costs of other improvements not
currently qualified • These., expanded qualified
i
improvements could nclude expansion of 'existing
_ -
faciliti ,le, interior remodeling, propertj,acquiaition
,-
for expansion purposes, demolition of existing
required
structures, construction of puvlic
improvements, etc. Agency participation in such a
_
program should be carefully structured co that the
Agency does not compete with local lending
'
institutions.
9
t.
<..vc..a 3
r.
F0*W11 a,ul.r.rd 1polrle TIN
lgil tlm Progru
Pp. Ig
FINANCE PLAN FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION PRC.i, • d
Preliminary cost estimates for the projects containud in ea:h
of the proposed Target Areas have been developed by the
Engineering Division.
PEASE 1: VINEYARD AVE/ $ 6,219,763
WEX END TARGET AREA
PHASE 2: HERNSA AVE/ $ 3,538,642
ARMBAID AVE TARGET AREA
PHASE 3: HELiM9N AVENUE, TARGET AREA $ 3,540,000
•.r:7 �: AVEMIE TAR= MM S 2,955,51A
Total Constmction Cost $16,253,923
Administration $ 812,696
Engineering, Inspection 2,438,088
20M pjaamb = COST $19,504,707
Total project cost is given in current dollars, and does not
include any allowance for inflation. Due to the projected
time frame of 8 -10 years for implementation, it is reasonable
to assume that the cost will escalate over the life of the
program However, because the Agency's revenue is derived
from the value of new construction in the Project Area, it is
also reasonable to assume that tax increment receipts will
escalate at a similar rate. Therefore, it is anticipated
that the Agency will receive sufficient revenue to pay for
the projects
Additionally, the costs identified above do not include land
acquisitions which may be required to implement the Plan.
Minor right -of -way acquisitions should be negotiated with the
property owners is exchange for the cost of the public
improvements However, the cost of parcel consolidation
cannot be accurately estimated at this time, due to the
volatility of the real estate market.
Because of the significant cost of this program, and becr...e
of other projects identified in the Redevelopment Plan, such
as the high priority 93 acre central perk (complete with
state of the art library, sports, and theater facilities),
the timing of this Implementation Plan should be spread over
a ten (10) year period. Projections of tax increment growth
3 4
r
1
rOKMll *Ad ,rd fpclfta F1.e
lwl. .U. Fm9r"
F." ID
over the .text 10 -12 years indicate that, upon settlement of
the Plan Amendment lawsuits, sufficient revenue will ba _
received by the Agency to fund this program, through the use _
of tax allocation bonds, without adversely affecting other
Agency projects.
In order for thu Agency to fund this program, a finding must
be made, at the time of any bond sales, that no other
reasonable means of financinq is available. In that regard,
Agency staff has examined other means of financing the
program, including Community Facilities (Mello -Roos)
Districts and Assessment Districts.
Due to the similarity of these two financing mechanisms, the
following facts apply to both.
Because the corridor consists of a large number of
small, separately -owned parcels, the prospect'-
of-gaining approval from the properry owners of either
a Mello -Roos or Assessment Di36rict is unlikely.
Formation of either district would require a heavy
investment in public relations /education, program
development, and staff time, with minimal
anticipation of approval.
The economic condition of the corridor argues
against the formation of a Mello -Roos or Assessment
District. Since the bulk of the corridor is
characterized by small, underutilized parcels, the
formation of a Mello -Roos or Assessment District
would require an investment by the property owners
which wouli extend beyond the economic life of their
properties. Additionally, it would be difficult to
convince the owners of the non - conforming
residential properties of the benefits of the
program. It is, therefore, unreasonable to expect
the owners to finance the identified improvements,
which are beyond the normal development
requirements.
The improvements identified in the Specific Plan
provide benefit to the entire community, not just to
hose properties directly associated with their
construction Additionally, if the assessments were
to be levied only on those properties within the
corridor, it would be impossible to equitably
determine the benefit, end thus the individual
assessment, to the property owners. "Activity
centers ", for instance, provide a benefit to the
entire corridor, and not just those in the
identified intersections. Yet determining the
9.15'
Vm bill soalward 6ppalelo Fl,a
Seylene�tlm erwrr
amount of benefit is each property could require
arbitrary assumptions.
The cost of the improvements identified in the
Specific Plan are tco high to allow adequate return ;
on equity for the property owners This means that,
at this time, it is unlikely that private
development will bear the cost of the installation
of these improvements. Further, private development
is unlikely to assume the cost -,of parcel
consolidation, to the extent identified above. Thus
small vacant properties will not develop in a manner
consistent with the Specific Plan, and those
properties currently developed with a non - conforming
use will not improve, but will be a hindrance to the
development of surrounding properties.
ti-
Thus, at this time, there is no other reasonable means of
financing the implementatioc of the Specific Plan except
through the use of Redevelopment Agency resources. In
anticipation of this finding, the Rancho Redevelopment Plan
was amended in 1987 specifically to include the Foothill
Boulevard improvements. Under the Tax Reform Act of 1986,
the identified projects are eligible for funding with tax
allocation bond proceeds due to the public nature of the
improvements.
CONSTRAINTS TO AGENCY FINANCING
It is calculated that during Fiscal Year 1987/88, the
Redevelopment Agency will reach its approved tax increment
and bonded indebtedness limitations For this reason, an
amendment to the Redevelopment Plan was initiated, with its
final approval in August, 1987. This amendment raised the
tax increment limitation from $11,255,000 per year to $100
Million per year; and the bonded indebtedness, limitation
from $50 Million to $500 Million during the 40 year life of
the Plan.
This increase in financing limitations was necessary due to
the increased cost of the redevelopment activities identified
in the Plan. Additionally, the amendment clarified and
specified terrain improvements which originally were included
as generalized projects. Among these were the Foothill
Corridor Smpro•,ements.
while the amendment does identify the financing of this
project as an anticipated Agency activity, it is being
challenged by certain affected taxing agencies.
3(D ,a
27,
4o, 'e-
R�4'
� A.-�j
ifla rim
"Projections ! ru e Revenues i,nd ica te6t4 h&wtij upon -'
x c
tTh tn,
settlement 9 ws Buff Jcient°'CrevOni ll on,
�
received b A9 a c over the lite of,the,implementati
, Ban identified improvements
Plan to fu•j a Cos of-.t
ax oc fdW4Rdnds.%' 50wOver with-the-
1 1
through the•use of,
aettlement,Of t I at- ti a -at' least one year away! the,
issues* is
ear lies practical' ate, or a first of"theas
Fiscal, Year 989/901i
ates�tO participation
Implementation Plan relparticipation
Therefore, thin
settlement of the lawsuits-
by the Agency only upon
3,
27,
foothill Bxa".rd Sp. tno f1.. ,
lftA Um frogr..
Fjq* 33
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
The following considerations must be addressed in order to
implement the program outlined above. These policy questions
will help to establish the priorities and function of the
program. ! -
v
1. AOZMCy PJLRfZC3'PA7SCMlZZKWCXNG. To uhat extent
shall the Agency participate in'the Implementation
Plan? Shall the Agency only consider participating
in the public improvements? Shall the Agency.
provide incentives aimed specifically at inducing -
redevelopment along the corridor? ,
;y
2. SNCiNTM PROGRAMS.` What types of incentives
shall the Agency make available for redevelopment of
the corridor?
2. TZNZXO:, Shall the Implementation Plan be
structured as a ten (10) year program, or shall the
Implementation Plan be given exclusive use of Agency
financial resources in order to implement the
program as quickly as possible?
3. PJSISZNG ALTIIRNATM. Shall the Phasing Program
adhere to the racbmmended phases, or shall it begin
with the Alternative Phase identified above?
4. PAROM CONSOLZDATZON. Shall the Agency develop a
consolidation program which specifically identifies
properties targeted for acquisition, or shall
:onsolidation be considered on a case -by -case basis
as the interest /opportunity arises?
6. MCZSTZNG JIOSZNZSSZS. What types of programs
shall the Agency develop to assist existing
businesses? Shall the current loan program be
expanded to include improvements not currently
qualified in the program?
Respectfully submitted,
r Jock am, CP
q Deputy Executive Director
3r
r•
� �tf
S ,S
7, IC ui
y 6iJ
W
■
�+ e o
0
✓ o
C
N m
�y0
C = U O
u o
..°...0, ','o . a 0
w� a d O
u m 40
yO'�q uO
�a M>,
w C V 0 w 0
m
.$
40
3.
O p O G
> B d L
PM
O N M d
u O U M O
ND ~Xd
N m >
wN E wN
C G
b O E m m
Nm ✓w �, d
m U m m ✓
m x.00 OA
6 d.0., O. u b
WMI
J
a
H
u
N
a
Y
0
m
rn
a
m
H
m
V
O
m
m
u
M
m
R
N
m
0
m
H
C
M
n
3�
a
'
W
Z
J
Q
J
a
H
u
N
a
Y
0
m
rn
a
m
H
m
V
O
m
m
u
M
m
R
N
m
0
m
H
C
M
n
3�
■
o
m
ul
16
I
Z
m
m
CD
IE
k,
'1
ti
We
k,
'1
w.
14,
mss:,
Wj-
L
6.
2
AI
it
Jo
n.
I
.It
Jo