The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1986/03/20 - Agenda Packet - RDAwell C��CA.ifq CrrY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA LL ' REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY p AGENDA 1977 Lions Park Comisaoity Center 9161 Same Line Road Rancho Cucamonga, California March 20. 1986 -- 7.00 e.m. A. Roll Calla Wright _, Ruquat _, Mikale Dahl _, and Ring _. D. Approval of Minutest Nona Submitted 2. DasYr r -eceni : The following Coast Calendar iteme are expected to be routine and am-controversial. They will be acted up" by the RDA at sae time witbout discussion. A. Approval to receive and file current Investment Schedule as of March 12. 1986. No it." submitted Wool 1114 OUWI.. $Rol, L14.) u. , 2 0 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: INSTITUTION RANCHO CUCAMONGA Redevelopment Agency �Jun D. 311ke1. .y,.,.r� ChwI .1. Duque II Je7ne7 Kim RkhvdSt. D.Id P.me1.3.Wr16ht March 12, 1986 Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency Jim Hart, Treasurer Receive and File - Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency Investment Schedule Status Report as of March 12, 1986 RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 110MMENT SCHEDULE STATUS 7EFGRT- PURCHASE MATURITY INTEREST DATE _ DATE AMOUNT RATE California Federal Savings 11/04/85 05/05/86 200,000.00 0.08200 Great Western Swings 11/12/85 05/12/86 500,600.00 0.08100 Great Western Savings 12/17/85 06 /iG /86 1,000,00n.00 0.07900 Local Agency Invest Fund 02/28/86 As Needed 1,900,000.00 0.09170 Local Agency Invest Fund 02/28/86 As Needed 3 ',000.00 0.09170 Great Western Savings 03/06/86 06/06/86 1,— d,291.25 0.01500 Great Western Savings 03/10/86 07/08/86 f00,000.00 0.07350 Great Western Savings 03/10/86 06/09/86 100.000.00 0 07300 Great Western Savings 03/10/86 04/09/86 100,000.00 0.07300 As of 03/12/86 Grand Total 8,588,291.25 All investments are Certificates of Deposit 9310 BASELINE ROAD. SUITE C • POST OFFICE BOX a 07 • RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA 91730 • (711(9419,1631 CITY OF RANCHO C REDEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT DATE: February 19, 1986 TO: Chairman and Members of the Redevelopment Agency FROM: Jack Lam, AICP, Deputy Executive Director BY: Linda D. Daniels, Senior Redevelopment Analyst SUBJECT: FEASIBILITY CONSULTANT CONTRACT FOR PROPOSED HOUSING BOND PROGRAM USING HOUSING SET ASIDE FUND BACKGROUNDS In the beginning of this fls:al year the Redevelopment Agency appointed two members to work as a subcommittee for developing a program for the 20% housing set aside fund. The subcommittee has been meeting and reviewing various options and combinations of possible housing programs which will meet the Agency's needs. Specifically, the subcommittee has been focusing on usinr the money available for a bond program, in which the proceeds will be used to emphasize neighborhood conservation by Improving Infrastructure which benefit qualified neighborhoods and improve the housing stock. In order to begin meeting the RDA's legal obligations with respect to the housing set aside fund, at Its February II, 1986 meeting the subcommittee recommended Initiation of this program for full Agency consideration. Other smaller scale program components are still under consideration by the subcommittee. EVALUATION: The proposed bond program would utilize the sale of a tax allocation and n wh c the deaf service payments would he made through the housing set aside fund revenues. The proceeds of the bond sale would go towards providing capital Improvements In qualified low and moderate Income neighborhoods. These capital Improvements could consist of such work as street repaving, Installation of street lights, curb, gutter and sidewalk, storm drains and and other similar types of neighborhood Infrastructure improvements. This type of Improvement enables the most efficient leverage of funds and has the greatest benefit to neighborhood enhancement In target neighborhoods as well as the City. In order for the subcommittee to complete Its analysis and develop tiw specifics of a T.A. Issue, it is necessary to do a feasibility report which Identities which neighborhoods o� f REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF REPORT Feasibility Consultant Controct/Proposed Housing Bond Progrom/Housing Set Aside Furl February 19,1986 Page 2 In the City with sotto economic characteristics which qualify under redevelopment low. At the present time the subcommittee has prepared a list of potential improvements which ore located in potential target areas. The neighborhood and storm drain project list wil l be used as a basis for both the study and the structuring for a T.A. bond issue. Once the study is completed it will then be Possible to prioritize those improvements within qualifying neighborhodds which wll be funded with the proceeds of the bond Uwv. This prioritized list wTA be' brought bock to the A'ge'ncy for revtew or;ce 4w housing study confirms th'a't the improvements will qua)ify. Based on estimated housing set aside revenues for this fiscal ye(r, and in consideration of today's market, a bond pirogrom of between $8 and $1`0 million could be sold. The subcommittee has recommendedthot the proceed +of the bond issue be used Initially fa• those projects that will provide the most benefit to target neighborhoods and the City as a whole. It is anticipated that the projects funded under the program will ^ansist of o combinatimi of storm drain end neighborh.od infrastructure Improvements. The subcommittee recommends the Agency's housing feasibility 'consvltast, Dr. Joseph Janezyk Evans of Empire Economics to do the work. The subcommittee expects the Agency's very successful bond team to develop the structime of the T.A. issue at a later date. In the meantime, the cost of preparing the feasibility study is estimated to be $10,000 and will take approximately 6 weeks to complete. Because the Tax Reform Act now before Congress M 3838) has an offective date of January I, 1986, any bond Issue considered for this program must comply with the new restrictions. This will necessitate some additional actions on the Agency's port. The most formidable of these new restrictions requires that 5% of the net bond proceeds be expended within 30 days of bond closing. Failure to comply with this restriction would cause the bond to be taxable. To avoid this possibility, bond counsel has Indicated that 5% will be required to be expended prior to closing. As a mechanism to comply with this requirement, bond counsel has suggested that the City and Agency execute a reimbursement agreement, under the terms of which any City funds advanced to pay for work related to the progrom would b'e reimbursed by the Agency upon the sale of the bond Issue. This would help to meet the 5% rule and help the s City'e capital improvements program at the some time. T,. Bond Counsel Indicates this agreement should be in place prior to the sale of the bond C issue in order to Insure that any reimbursable costs are eligible under the provisions of HR 3838. It may also become necessary to advance furls from the Housing Set Aside ," REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF REPORT Feasibility Consultant Contract/Proposed Housing Bond Program/Housing Set Aside Fund February 19, 1986 Page 3 Fund (Fund 21) in order to be certain that sufficient expenses have been Incurred at the time of bond closing. Engineering division estimates $40,000 to $50,000 has already been spent in the proposed targeted neighborhoods, which can be reimbursed. They also estimate it will take 4 to 6 months to Initiate contracts for the work involved In the program. Additionally, the entire amount of net bond proceeds must be expended within three years ork which cen reasonably besaccomplishedfw thi thins three years3,which u1so1 mpocts the staffing needs of the engineering division. Based on the Increment available to the Housing ._t Aside Fund, staff estimates an $8 million to $10 million Issue could be sold. Depending upon the projects selected for construction, this may require additional engineering staff of up to 3 persons to Implement, as this program would double the present capital Improvements program, a sizeable effort. No authorization of the bond Issue Is being sought at present, only the feasibility study and development of a reimbursement agreement. The entire program request will be submitted for review after the feasibility study and after development of staffing and financing programs. RECOMMENDATION: A. The Agency authorize the Chairman to execute a contract with Em re canon cs for the necessary housing study, from the Agency Housing Set Aside Fund, in an amount not to exceed $10,000. B. Authorize staff to prepare a Reimbursement Agreement between the Agency and City for approval at Its next meeting. Respectfully s m fed, V Jack Lam, AICP Deputy Executive Director JLsOJ:kap 5 EMPIRE ECONOMICS Joseph T. Janczyk Evans. quite 200 3550CapistranonBsachBnCA 92624 March 5, 1986 Mr. Olen Jones Redevelopment Analysis 9320 Baseline Rd. (714) 661 -7012 1 r1,pt;;,'icirl L':il!:,U.111 L 7:s6 ra IOLIId':ii�:1`S:a LriLri 71H,�1 P.O. Box 807 CA 91730 Rancho Cucamonga, Re: Rancho Cuoamonga's Housing Needs Study ovemmenen for Designated Imprt Areas (Drainage and other Types) Dear Olen: ou with a cescription of Pursuant to our convareation, ,ce are providin6 Y Rancho u for the consul*�139 serviAalonBnwith the ltimefrrequirements andfinanaial Housing Naafis Study, consideration. Services Description of Consulting Empire Economics will perform a comprehensive analysis of the housing following needs of Rancho Cucamonga through a systematic analysis of the factors: _ ._..a �ovw and other • Identification or rr "j— - HOD Specification improvements • of low /moderate income levels using statistics for 1986 ro ortion of low /moderate income • Determination of the P P areas, through a consideration of households in each of the project the following: + Income levels, based upon 1900 Census Data along with updates + Recent studios for CDDG Areas (Income Surveys) + prises for Exis Housing ting /New + Other relevant income indicators S `r 0 Comparison of HUD low /moderate income levels with the proportion of low /modorate income households in each of the Project Areas. 6 Prioritization of the Project Areas based upon the proportion of the low /moderate income households. Thus, the study will provide you with a determination of the Project Areas that fulfill the low /moderate income requirements as well as a prioritization of these areas. Time Sohedule for Financial Considerations The study commenced on February 19, 1986 and will be completed by April 7, 1986, or sooner, if so desired. The fee for the Consulting services is estimated to be $8,500- $10,000 and will not exceed $10,000. He are looking forward to providing you with assistance in derering the qualification otatus of the various Project Areas in terms of their housing needs. Sincerely, �toateh Jan zyk�Evans, Ph.D. Economic Consultant Y f CITY VELOPMENTU CE[3CY � RED STAFF REPORT DATE: February 25, 1586 TO: Members of the Housing Subcommittee FROM: Lloyd B. Hobbs, City Engineer BT: Blame Frandsen, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Capital Improvements for Low and Moderate Income Neigborhoods The following n February followi opioty 111t1986submitted in response to a request by the is favorsicertainestorm drainb installations, tprimary mthe eTurnerell which The prorit slection is ased first on ermosaand Lower Turners Storm Drains. to eachnofctheECOmminitleseexhibiting aineedtreet Project Priority Listing 1. Design of all phases of Turner - Hermosa Storm Drain System. Constructin Of excavationo the e,41ta Lroma Basins0 (Phase r Street and basin I construction). Design & Phase I construction estimate: $3,000,000.00 2. Southwest Cucamonga Neighborhoods: p5: S 540,000.OG dl S 325 000.00 3T,�0 b- 3. Baker - Arrow Storm grain (should be constructed prior to or concurrent with Southwest Cucamonga Neighborhood /4) Design & Construction Estimate: $1,000,000.00 4. North Town Sewersm(CCNU) S1�510�000 00 S. Etiwanda Neighborhoods P1, /2, }3 (Designs near complete) !2 S165,00 O 0.D QO 5265 600 $ , z a REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Capital Improvements for Low & Moderate Income Neighborhoods February 25, 1986 Page 2 6. Central Cucamonga Neighborhoods fl, /3 (Plans currents being #1 $350,000.00 y y prepared) /3 $350'OOa 0.000 7. Old Alta Loma Neighborhood !1 (Phase I): PHASE I Alley at City Hall S 17,000 La Mesa 81,200 Layton 61,000 Lomita 116.200 La Grande 118,200 La Vine 98 200 S — 586;800 TOTAL FIRST PRIORITY $8,321,800 Prime alternate should one or the other protect deiay would be Southwest Cucamonga Neighborhood /4 for $572,700.00 to follow the Baker Arrow Storm Drain installation. SECONDARY PRIORITY OR SECOND BOND SALE 1. Old Alta Loma Neighborhood fl Phase II: West side Amethyst S 17,000.00 Monte Vista $142,000.70 *Hellman Avenue $440,000.00 CLWD ff 95,,0,00 2. Hellman Avenue Storm Drain .' *Must precede or be f2,500,000.00 coordinated with Hellman Avenue ` Improvements 3. Southwest Cucamonga /3, 04, 02 S 344,100.00 S 572,700.00 SID 800.00 ' 4. Central Cucamonga Neighborhood /2 S 711,500.00 S M REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Capital Improvem=nts for Low & Moderate Income Neighborhoods February 25, 1986 Page 3 S. Old Alta Loma Neighborhoods !2, I3, f4, 05, /6 S 220,000.00 $ 385,000.00 S 400,000.00 S 271,600.00 51 247 ' 750 ' 00 U.524, 50 6 6. Turner - Hermosa Storm Drain Phasi: II Construction Church Street to ninth of 19th Street and peripheral I nes $3,000,000.00 TOTAL SECOND PRIORITY $10,857,450.00 LBh:BF: jaa s, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR LOW 81 MODERATE INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS VICINITY MAP t E 0 E H 0 .ru ..rm.0 cram FIRST PRIORITY PROJECTS woos ® NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECT CRY OF RANCHO CUCAMON6A AN STORM DRAIN PROJECT ;l t� CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR LOW 8 MODERATE INCOME - NEIGHBORHOODS VICINITY MAP L_ F l •". taw, .. r' LE0CND e`...m ""`• °'eY` "•'0'• SECOND PRIORITY PROJECTS + NEIOHEORHOOD PROJECT 11 CfTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA „i 00 *00 STORM DRAIN PROJECT