HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA AG PKT 2011-06-13 #2 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA STAFF REPORT
DATE: June 13, 2011
TO: Chairman and Agency Members
THRU: Jill R. Ingram, Acting Executive Director
FROM: Sean Crumby, PE Director of Public Works
SUBJECT: UPDATE REGARDING PREPARATION OF
PROPOSITION 84 GRANT APPLICATION
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
It is requested the Redevelopment Agency authorize submittal of a Proposition
84 grant application.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS:
In 2006, the voters of the State of California approved Proposition 84. This ballot
measure appropriated $5.39 billion to the State for various purposes including
water quality, resource protection, and park improvements. In September of
2010, the State announced that a call for grants would be upcoming. In
preparation of the grant opportunity on October 10, 2010, the Redevelopment
Agency awarded a professional services agreement to the firm of Carrier
Johnson + Culture to prepare a grant application. The formal announcement of
the grant was made on January 25, 2011.
On January 25, 2011, the State of California formally announced that $184
million would be available for award with a deadline for grant submittal set at July
1, 2011. The grant can range up to $5.0 million for each individual project and
requires no city matching contribution.
For this grant opportunity, the 4.5 acre property located at 151 Marina Drive has
been identified as the most competitive project. This site is currently owned by
two oil companies. The grant will fund property acquisition. The City has not
begun negotiations yet with the property owners. The submittal of the grant only
requires a non - binding "Letter of Interest" from the property owners. Both owners
have verbally agreed to sign the letter and are working to have the proper
signatory sign the document. The property has environmental concerns given
that historically this property was used in the oil industry. The City does not know
Agenda Item 2
Page 2
the extent of the environmental cleanup at this time. Staff is pursuing an
environmental assessment from the property owners. Also, staff has received
proposals from environmental engineering firms to prepare an assessment. If it
becomes apparent that the City will receive the grant or the City desires to enter
into formal negotiations with the property owners, an action to prepare a detailed
environmental analysis will be brought to the City Council to authorize moving
forward with the assessment.
On January 27, 2011, the City and consultant team held a kick off meeting for the
grant application preparation. During this meeting, a schedule was set for the
preparation of the grant application. The grants are administered on a
competitive scoring system. 18% of the scoring is based upon conducting
community planning meetings. In addition to being a good idea, the community
has embraced the process. A schedule of the meetings that were held are listed
as follows:
• February 17, 2011 at 6:00 pm in the City Council Chambers;
• March 2, 2011 at 6:00 pm in the Mary Wilson Library Senior Center;
• March 15, 2011 at 3:00 pm in the Fire Station 48 Community Center;
• March 15, 2011 at 6:00 pm in the Seal Beach Tennis Center;
• March 16, 2011 at 6:00 pm in the Mary Wilson Library Senior Center;
• March 21, 2011 at 7:00 pm in the First United Methodist Church (Leo
Meeting);
• March 30, 2011 at 6:00 pm in the City Council Chambers;
• Planning Commission Meeting April 20, 2011; and
• Parks and Recreation Commission April 27, 2011
The first six meetings were designed to receive input from the community.
Workshops were held and numerous ideas were generated. Additionally,
resident input forms were distributed during these meetings and posted on the
City's website. At the time this staff report was prepared, the City has received
over 170 total input forms. A presentation will be made detailing this process. At
the seventh meeting (March 30, 2011), the grant team presented three
alternative designs based upon the input received from the community. The
three concepts are attached to this staff report, but conceptually are as follows:
• Concept A: Provide amenities while utilizing the existing park;
• Concept B: Provide amenities in the most functional manner; and
• Concept C: Close 1 Street and provide amenities in the most functional
manner
During the 7 meeting, the community selected Concept C with a few
modifications. This concept has become known as the community's "Preferred
Concept ". This concept was presented to both the Planning Commission and
Recreation and Parks Commission. Both Commissions approved the preferred
concept. Several concerns were raised by several commissioners and the River
Page 3
Beach Town homes. The concerns center around the location of the parking on
the westerly portion of the park. The parking was selected in that area in an
attempt to reuse the existing pavement within the first street northbound
roadway.
After the concepts were presented, the grant preparation team began the
process of estimating cost to ensure that the grant submitted can be delivered by
the City. The preferred concept at this point has an estimated cost of just over
$13 million. The grant team is prepared to submit the grant in one of two
versions. The grant team has prepared two exhibits that meet a budget of $5.0
million and $10 million. These scaled back concepts have been prepared to offer
as many of the amenities as possible within the allocated budgets. They have
been designed such that the additional amenities that the community has asked
for can be added in the future if funding becomes available. In 2008, the City
designated $5.0 million for construction of a new City pool. The City will be
requesting $5.0 million from the State of California with the Proposition 84 grant.
The two exhibits have been prepared to detail the grant application with a
commitment of $5.0 million from the City or with no commitment from the City.
By submitting the grant application, the City and Redevelopment Agency have no
commitment to move forward. If after award of the grant, it becomes apparent
that the property acquisition or the environmental cleanup result in' the project
being cost prohibitive, the RDA/City will give up the grant. In order to receive the
funds; however, the City and RDA will be committed to delivering upon the
project as submitted within the grant application. The items within the park can
move, but the elements must be included. The City Council will therefore need to
commit the $5.0 million pool designated towards this site if the ($10 million)
concept is to be submitted. Staff is requesting direction on whether to submit the
$10 million park concept or the $5.0 million park concept.
It is anticipated that the State will respond with results from the grant application
in the spring of 2012.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None with this action. The preparation of the grant has already been budgeted
and was approved by the Redevelopment Agency on October 10, 2010.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Redevelopment Agency authorize submittal of
proposition 84 grant application.
Page 4
SUBMITTED BY: NOTED AND APPROVED:
_.„„
A 0 arni
Sean Crumby, PE . Ingram
Director of Public Works / Acting Executive Di ector
Attachments:
A. Concept A
B. Concept B
C. Concept C
D. Community Preferred Concept
E. Recommended Park Plan - $10M
F. Recommended Park Plan - $5M
•
, -
, ■ ,
a...
11) P '
I VA
2 ,•5
1
, -..,.;,• -,... -- NA,
...
i
1 i
' \ .) 8
\\\\ JL J L J
tw) 1
it If'
l' - , , u , Avm 1VAVNIIVD
rt) , . 1 i, - ; —,,
- • , ,
---
. 7 " ' , ,t7; 79 1
-)
.....tri
\ ■ 4* ' ..7.N. .,,.--,711,e) _ . . , '7111114:1 i .4g
+
\
4) "ki,
' -
A 01!
E t.L1
\ ,,■, V,1:.''''-t-ft/"11 .'i) ''g' .1'1,g/J,. ''' --.: 1'7 \''--
)
1 , ' ,1 '
< 'LI
ILI M
m a,
_a 0
< --,
W LU
U.1
NC
'''''■ 4 '..,-..',,''',)„ '--;\ ‘..'''';';'' /
.._
m
_0.
on
a_
<
=
F-
a_
w v
c) .
0
0
G
I :
r--
0
0
, 'i , l ... '
i
, ,,,,17-: ''''.-.1:4441)'"r1;::':::..,,:kT:°:;1
i
m G S
i �� yi v
t
J 6
1
y �P
,,,,,,,,, ...., or,,,,, „,......,,,
4 + L . O
J [
1
1
J L
. „i . - '''''%. ) ' ' ''' 16 -�
°' f �
AVM 13nvNav3
v
x�_
,,,,., 40„.. \....,_
Nc.';'''')?"-'4-i) ri,2) '2,
: , X
-� i . ,--' a o M ,�A
a
O
1 1 ;' :s...v : 6i � �, f fPa I a
A - W
N Z
g a,.
' ) 5'-' G f. O f 1, V
co El-
W �
0
�a U a
a
z
a
m
Z
a
J
Q
U
Z
O
U
I
+ c
O + I
C ,'£!
.= I
i.. fP%
® a t
E '0
0 R
ii �J
S
s > o
3 3
a t " `„E ' oh s ` - ' m ,
— a� f'
' i
F 1 -. u9
: 5 1`x!1 v/ "<� ��?§
tz
Lu
(� 9 . \ �s g °�" O o,g c
` _ 1. t g 0� t lF` ill g o3 'l_s ` E Iy2ai ` Ni: oa —
It, nn� s
,_., p kV', N Ait it yt,,,,,..;,,,, ' ' 1r 4_01; .0,- 'e----rillirditto'' - it F.' -L'''
i P3
t , - To..iO4,...., iv, ter 4 l-ik,
• _ "' mt , \ Orm--..s. , . -• — , _ ilk .,
....... ..,,,....,,,,,,,,,,,... -, \ „., -t,, T o9 a ' yn - ."!i.� . a .
i
E SQ Ego � 1 C } xi
x 5� f Y/C '� - , @ I E ,,,,,,,:a t 9,�
E-1° 40; '' /IN tio'Itt.-... ,'
111.11410.LIP Nw
t.' 41%1111411111111kfttO r 7°1* Ce
O
F E -
m $ � Y V +
c a
O m t!'n o.1 c Ai 8 o d Z
°' ="E '7' rasa . S =t d' ..,,, ,,,7-----
o a sea3 �'a as s4 s �Y3 Q
�3 ^ a a c Flt Eg
m
ro
Z
Q
J
a
4
w
cc
w
w
Li
a
a
z
M
O
U '-
I
L __ . - - --
r
+
, . +
= :.• . •
, .
0
2 'A
•'
0
aa PI'
. 1 V'
Ing
F.1
.\/./ • , ! ' :: , t 4 , , \
''''" 11 - CT; ' .- ' '''''...''.■: % -, ' '
„.
.7,
',..\ -",,--',.-- '1 9 ''''.:-.•_, - ..., ''''.
i
..,) 1 T
.J--
--, ,,,, ,,,,
:4, ski 1 ,. , ,,,,
L L J
43
,-,,,,,• . •,.,
.4. ,I. . „.. .
-----, ' ) , ,-- , :- '--- ,,,,_...,,,„,,,,, Busy ed snq
2
4 0% 4 4 ' • -'-''.> • - 1
, A. • . !..1•11mir , A -- 7 -, ..Awww. , 7 - :..,
. f. ,,
- .\ - ',"1 ' ''' ,-
64 '...-,:°4 /). 3 E'.• s'i=”. , . F3 - . i 40 --r.. 771 s'''?g ■..
' ) 4 .-±- ±- 7)/ - -.7 5 '.- , ',•
9 4, ...\, _E )1 : : .7 ---. . - - ' -4 ,.v .0„
16,
.."':
cs
..., , , ..
,,,, -A.:.:•.,- ;,, i 2, , , f , ,,,, 1 . 1 .• . ...,2 8 , i ',! 7 . 1, , , . - _
__„,
1 I i • ' 4 • l'''' •
' .., - -- - . , , . • '
..
, e,,, ,, ‘
. - Willit y l., .. ' , i.
-• . • • • ... : . cf.': • '
-,--,- 1 . _.,.. It •7 , . 4. n
II: < • •,,t,':„...,',:. ,-,, "r1 -- 4 1 :.,..,' 47 - eA
1 C ' )
. 7 -... 6
4
' • r :,.iii;,„...e, :' . - 4. -
= 1--
L.) z
... .
< LU
* - -. 2'
tu M
• ' 't.- 2,
Ca el-
f ) ' IR . `"' • ‘
—1 0
._ • )
al LU
, • „7 .......-.' .• u> >.
L.LI
- • •
0
>- ce
+
<
Z
FE
<
M
(,)
z
n
a_
<
D
1--
c, 71
z t-
0
C.)
- + - 4 + + +
e ''I VS C
. =i s
ID RN
.
t;+a N b Z' 3 j o
° a idi il
- E J1 . o H TO
\ 1 '' l Fi i '
1 i i il m 1
iiiii6 = h
Olt ktO .. -. ' ' E ,_ ,
mo w
LC o
a �� `
=,. A pr, . q %� �� ,� - -; A VM 13AV8VO
r ..
ek 16.■ 1 ki i If 1 .14/01 �' Q�` ..;,F I
cry C?; / A � `, ( e � ` dr iI I l E
``c @ E J
- '. a
417 4 , 1 `
cc
,It'''7;151 I `-'-'1'1 :5'1 \ '‘L.-.\'' wa >ik `&' S a � - A �g,, m �E m6 Q ' U Z
.,,c,.-i 1 _ , _, , „_.,,,„ \ _ ... ,
`_ tl ° K n s m��s �� " co Q.
o �a w
W
7a -------, O
t 3 t E l_ ! —
43 +
E o -_ - \ =
a 2� m Q.
__ b
.,S m - Z
a 2 a.7°, 4! c m o Q
M
Z
O
J
_J
Lt)
Z ¢
a
ce
a
0
W
0
t - z
W T
O
U
C
+ + + +
0
= j
.
0
.`;,
o PR
co n
c
yy c E -
H Nd N
a N-.'" 3 ° o
Z 9 -
rn`! Yo A iII
E q s
3
S F ,
/4\ E j
°o sa
a i n `�� s , o, � � �s� Q
,,f-.,-tl 04" -4g` j o na
V`7 0 �% 4111 o - i . „
�2 Q �n 1 0 6 c 2r . ih
q y ca5� a �
\" Lc - � i 4 �'.. i �� l trig! P
�.{� � $ ft,,,,,..)4411i,
, z,,T , ... \ , 4t;',41 cle ‘,, 6-i,, 'le,
6 m o
1 ■
1 ° A »�s b `f c
.1- V'0. e ♦ i
e :.-,- - . \ \ et) 1-,-211.11kw.:2: qui,. .nr, ,- LE
� v e...,;...1p....
'� , z' 1 } �
(; / a s Z
�§ __ n g r — + • �• �s. v v sue- ��Fy y am:. R L 6i � \` Z
g.- ' oa ♦ ' a� /�,' 4 '? h} . ° a:= .sue +, / L '� 'S' � t' ;,I ' a Iti e t! , 4. s;Y � F es . i : �, o ' ,:' 8 �4 x Z
L � , Y y7J
� s
` lit .. n j� ili. _ Q W
i d W M
11111111 z3,- w Lii
U)W
o �
3 E- — a6 � a T
v o �z o c 2g k c V Q.
c i t e . g E s ill,. , ; Q
cmi aliii as3 m2' c s - u •. =B. i
v a at3d3 a c n n .
. m n 43m� C ^o Q
m
1".
I y
` � O +
J
J
O
Z
Y
K
Q
a
0
w
0
+ z
w
O
U t