HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDC/2004-26
(See Companion Resolutions CDC/2004-25, 2004-265)
RESOLUTION NO. CDC/2004-26
2
3
RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MAKING FINDINGS
REGARDING CONDITIONS OF BLIGHT IN THE REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA OF THE UPTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT,
APPROVING THE SECTION 33352 REPORT TO THE MAYOR AND
COMMON COUNCIL ON THE 2004 EMINENT DOMAIN AMENDMENT
TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE UPTOWN
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND APPROVING THE 2004 EMINENT
DOMAIN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
UPTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
WHEREAS, the City of San Bernardino ("City") is a charter city and municipal
corporation organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of California;
and
II
12
13
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of San Bernardino ("Agency") is a
public body, corporate and politic, organized and existing under the California Community
Redevelopment Law (the "CRL"). The CRL is found at Health and Safety Code Section 33000
14
15
16
et seq.; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council of the City ("Common Council"), by
adoption of Ordinance No. MC-527 on June 18, 1986, approved and adopted the Redevelopment
Plan for the Uptown Redevelopment Project; and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has subsequently adopted certain amendments to the
Redevelopment Plan for the Uptown Redevelopment Project as follows:
17
18
19
20
21
(i)
(ii)
Common Council Ordinance No. MC-927 on December 19,1995; and
Common Council Ordinance No. MC-1161 on December 1, 2003.
22
23
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan for the Uptown Redevelopment Project as adopted
by Common Council Ordinance No. MC-527, and as amended by Common Council Ordinance
No. MC-927, and as further amended by Common Council Ordinance No. MC-1161 is referred
to herein as the "Redevelopment Plan"; and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has initiated proceedings for the adoption of a further
amendment to the Redevelopment Plan to reinstate the Agency's power to acquire land in the
24
25
26
27
28
4825-3864-2432.1
-1-
P:\AgendasIResolutionslResolutions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
3
4
5
6
7
redevelopment project area of the Uptown Redevelopment Project (the "Project Area") by
eminent domain; and
WHEREAS, Common Council and the Community Development Commission of the
City of San Bernardino (the "Commission") which serves as the governing board of the Agency
have called upon the owners of property, residents, business operators and neighborhood
organizations in the Project Area to form a Project Area Committee for the purpose of having
consultations concerning the proposed reinstatement of the Agency's power of eminent domain
and the adoption of an amendment to the Redevelopment Plan (the "2004 Amendment") and the
potential of the Agency's exercise of the reinstated power of eminent domain to displace low-
and moderate-income residents through the exercise of eminent domain on residential properties
within the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the members of the Project Area Committee for the Project Area have
considered and approved the 2004 Amendment and have voted to recommend the Common
Council and the Commission that the 2004 Amendment be approved at the Joint Public Hearing
scheduled for July 19,2004 on the 2004 Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the 2004 Amendment does not propose to modify the boundaries of the
Project Area or change any of the financial provisions of the Redevelopment Plan. The 2004
Amendment is focused solely on the reinstatement of the Agency's eminent domain authority
with respect to all property in the Project Area for a twelve (12) year period following the
adoption of the ordinance of the Common Council adopting the 2004 Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Common Council consented to hold a joint public hearing with the
Commission with respect to the 2004 Amendment, at which public hearing any and all persons
having any objection to the 2004 Amendment or the Final Program Environmental Impact
Report described below, or the regularity of any prior proceedings concerning the 2004
Amendment, would be allowed to appear before the Commission and the Common Council and
show cause why the 2004 Amendment should not be adopted; and
WHEREAS, the joint public hearing of the Commission and the Common Council was
duly held on July 19, 2004 regarding the certification of the Final Program Environmental
Impact Report and the 2004 Amendment; and
WHEREAS, a Final Program Environmental Impact Report has been prepared in
connection with the consideration and approval of the 2004 Amendment and certain related
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4825-3864-2432.1
-2-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resolutions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
redevelopment implementing activities, including a redevelopment study project referred to as
the "Mercado Santa Fe Project" and the City General Plan Amendment No. 04-02, and the
Common Council has adopted its resolution entitled:
"RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ADOPTING A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, CERTIFYING A
FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, ADOPTING THE
MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN FOR THE REINSTATEMENT OF
EMINENT DOMAIN POWERS IN THE REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
AREAS OF THE UPTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA AND THE
CENTRAL CITY NORTH REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA, AND
OTHER ENTITLEMENT ACTIONS, APPROVING CERTIFYING A
TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPORT, AND
ADOPTING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 04-02"; and
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
WHEREAS, the Commission has adopted its resolution entitled:
"RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS A RESPONSIBLE AGENCY UNDER
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT ADOPTING A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND MAKING
FINDINGS THAT A FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT, AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING PLAN FOR THE
REINSTATEMENT OF EMINENT DOMAIN POWERS IN THE
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREAS OF THE UPTOWN
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND THE CENTRAL CITY NORTH
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT FULLY AND ADEQUATELY ADDRESS
THE POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE APPROV AL BY
THE COMMISSION OF SUCH REDEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS";
and
]2
13
14
15
16
17
18
]9
20
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the passage of this Resolution have occurred and
been taken in accordance with applicable law.
2]
22
NOW, THEREFORE THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, FIND AND DETERMINE AS
FOLLOWS:
23
24
SECTION 1. The information set forth in the Recitals of this Resolution is true an
25
26
correct. The Commission has conducted a full and fair joint public hearing with the Commissio
Council on July 19, 2004 regarding the 2004 Amendment.
SECTION 2. The purposes and intent of the Commission with respect to the 2004
Amendment is to reinstate the Agency's eminent domain authority with respect to all property in
27
28
4825-3864-2432.1
-3-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resolutions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
3
the Project Area for a twelve (12) year period thereby protecting and promoting the sound
redevelopment of the Project Area and the general welfare of the inhabitants of the City by
providing a method of property acquisition through the potential use of eminent domain in order
for the Agency to be able to assemble parcels, attract redevelopment interest by owners of land
and third persons and secure capital improvement in the Project Area by insuring its ability to
deliver property for redevelopment purposes as part of specific programs to eliminate and
prevent the spread of blight in the Project Area.
SECTION 3. The Commission has reviewed and considered all of the staffreports and
consultant reports prepared by or at the direction of the Agency and the City, the staff and
consultant's presentations submitted at the joint public hearing, including without limitation the
visual display of maps, graphs, charts and photographs and the written correspondence and oral
comments of interested persons submitted to the Commission and the Common Council at the
joint public hearing, and the "Report to Mayor and Common Council, 2004 Eminent Domain
Amendment, Uptown Redevelopment Report" (the "Section 33352 Report"), as part of its
consideration of the 2004 Amendment.
SECTION 4. (a) The Section 33352 Report contains a summary of facts and
information which indicate that conditions of blight continue to burden the Project Area. The
observation of the conditions of blight which afflict the Project Area is described in the Section
33352 Report. The Section 33352 Report includes both field observation of conditions in the
Project Area and analysis of technical data. The field observation was conducted by Agency
staff and qualified consultants, as described in the Section 33352 Report, all of whom have
significant experience in compiling and evaluating data relating to the existence of blight in a
redevelopment project area.
The Project Area displayed substantial evidence of blight in 1986 at the time when the
Redevelopment Plan was adopted. The existence of blight in 1986 was so prevalent that blight
caused a reduction and lack of property utilization of the area to such an extent that the lands in
the Project Area posed a physical and economic burden on the community.
CRL Section 33031 contains the primary source of law for the definition of "blight".
The following contains a summary of the information contained in the Section 33352 Report
which is organized under each of the four (4) elements or categories of "physical blight" (CRL
Section 33031(a)) and the five (5) elements or categories of "economic blight" (CRL Section
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4825-3864-2432.\
-4-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resolutions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
33031(b)). The applicable text of the statute is presented in bold-faced type, followed by a
2 summary ofthe applicable facts contained in the Section 33352 Report.
3 CRL Section 33031(a)(1): "Buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for person
4 to live or work. These conditions can be caused by serious building code violations
5 dilapidation and deterioration, defective design or physical construction, faulty 0
6 inadequate utilities, or other similar factors."
7 This provision describes one of the "classic" symptoms of blight. The informatio
8 summarized in the Section 33352 Report was assembled from field observation of the exterio
9 areas of buildings and structures visible to Agency staff and consultants from the public street
10 and public right-of-ways in the Project Area. It is believed that interior inspection of th
1] buildings and structures in the Proj ect Area, as well as closer inspections of the exterior areas 0
12 many properties which were not visible from public streets, would likely indicate many more an
13 potentially very serious life and safety related building deficiencies than described in the Sectio
]4 33352 Report.
15 Nevertheless, the Section 3352 Report indicates that 17.9% of the improved parcels 0
16 land in Subarea A of the Project Area contain buildings which display signs of dilapidation an
17 deterioration, and that 17.1 % of the improved parcels ofland in Subarea B of the Project Are
18 contain buildings which display signs of dilapidation and deterioration. [Section 3352 Report B
]9 3 and B-4.] It is noted that these numbers are likely to conceal a number of problems 0
20 symptoms of blight for the reasons stated above. Elsewhere in the Section 33352 Report, it i
21 noted that the Project Area contains a comparatively large number of vacant parcels of land
22 nearly one fourth (1I4th) of parcels are vacant [Section 33352 Report B-5]. In an older and full
23 urbanized area of a community such as the Project Area, such a large percentage of vacant 0
24 unused parcels of land often is an indication of long-standing conditions of blight. This larg
25 number of vacant parcels of land, in an otherwise fully developed urban area, is in large part th
26 result of an effective and sustained effort on the part of the City to enforce building and safet
27 laws [Section 33352 Report B-23]. As buildings have deteriorated in the Project Area, the Cit
28 has taken action to compel property owners to respond to such deterioration and life safet
dangers. In many, many cases over the past ten (10) years, property owners have elected t
4825-3864-2432.1 -5-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resolutions\2004\04-08-] 6 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
demolish such unsafe structures rather than repair them. [See Section 33352 Report B-23: "Fo
the five-year period of 1997-98 through 2001-02, code compliance for deterioration
dilapidation cases for the Project Area were higher by 6 times the City average."]
Thus the unusually high percentage of vacant parcels of land, plus the conditions a
observed in the Section 33352 Report relating to the condition of buildings serve to provid
confirming evidence that the condition of blight described in CRL Section 33032(a)(1) is presen
in the Project Area. [Section 33352 Report B-2 through B-7 and accompanying photographs a
B-8 through B-11.]
Furthermore, despite the extensive availability of vacant land to support new constructio
in the Project Area, new construction simply has not occurred for a number of interrelate
factors. A key among these is the fact that old lots - especially the commercially zoned lots
are too small to permit new development under current day planning and zoning standards
unless such vacant parcels are first assembled with adjacent.
In view of the information set forth in the Section 33352 Report the Commission hereb
finds that the condition of blight described in CRL Section 33031(a)(1) is present in the Projec
Area and is a prevalent and substantial condition which causes a reduction and lack of utilizatio
of the Project Area and substantially contributes to a serious physical and economic burden 0
the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by privat
enterprise or government action, or both without redevelopment.
CRL Section 33031(a)(2): "Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the
economically viable use or capacity of buildings or lots. This condition can be caused by a
substandard design, inadequate size given present standards and market conditions, lack
of parking, or other similar factors."
This condition or symptom of blight remains present in the Project Area. The large
number of vacant lots in the Project Area - 24% of all legal parcels are vacant in the Project
Area comprising approximately 22% of the total acreage of the Project Area - evidences this
symptom of blight [Section 33352 Report B-5]. The small size of parcels ofland in the Project
Area also contributes to the problem and in particular, prevents the reuse of many parcels on
which older buildings have already been demolished because of age and deterioration or
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4825-3864-2432.1
-6-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resolutions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
3
4
5
6
economic obsolescence. Small lot size - particularly on community yard properties - 8,000
square feet where the current zoning and development standards require lO,OOO square foot
commercial lot size minimum standard - prevent economically feasible reuse of property in the
Project Area in many, many cases. As stated in the Section 33352 Report, "assessing all the
parcels in the Project Area and comparing to the City's minimum lot requirements for each
General Plan land use, 70.1 % of the parcels are non-conforming and do not meet the minimum
lot requirement". [Section 33352 Report B-18]
In view of the information set forth in the Section 33352 Report the Commission hereby
finds that the condition of blight described in CRL Section 3303 1 (a)(2) is present in the Project
Area and is a prevalent and substantial condition which causes a reduction and lack of utilization
of the Project Area and substantially contributes to a serious physical and economic burden on
the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private
enterprise or government action, or both without redevelopment.
CRL Section 33031(a)(3): "Adjacent or nearby uses that are incompatible with
each other and which prevent the economic development of those parcels or other portions
of the project area."
This condition is a symptom of blight and is found in the Project Area. [Section 33352
Report B-15 through B-16 and accompanying photographs.] In addition, this condition is
compounded by the fact that the substantial majority of the residential use parcels of land which
are mixed in among the commercial use parcels along the main street traffic arterial streets are
non-conforming parcels of land. In the case of the "medium density" residential parcels of land
which are interspersed among the commercial use parcels (e.g. a residential parcel of land
improved with a fourplex situated between two small commercial use parcels improved with
"office" type or other nonresidential uses), 82.2% of such "medium density" residential use
parcels are non-conforming [Section 33352 Report B-19]. It should also be noted that the total
number of residential use parcels in the Project Area is fairly low (125 parcels out of a total of
1, 144 parcels) in comparison to the other "general commercial" lindustrial uses of land in the
Project Area. And yet the average number of residents per residential use parcel of land is
remarkably high (e.g. approximately 2,760 residents in the Project Area [Section 33352 Report
B-2l]). This indicates that the average number of residents per residential parcel is
approximately 23 persons per parcel. Since the majority of all residential use parcels are non-
7
8
9
10
]]
]2
13
]4
]5
16
17
]8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4825-3864-2432.1
-7-
P:\AgendasIReso1utionslReso1utions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
conforming or substandard in size, the evidence of incompatibility of land uses also serves to
provide evidence of the conditions of residential overcrowding which is observed in the Project
Area.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
]0
II
]2
13
]4
15
16
17
] 8
19
20
In view of the information set forth in the Section 33352 Report the Commission hereby
finds that the condition of blight described in CRL Section 3303 1 (a)(3) is present in the Project
Area and is a prevalent and substantial condition which causes a reduction and lack of utilization
of the Project Area and substantially contributes to a serious physical and economic burden on
the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private
enterprise or government action, or both without redevelopment.
CRL Section 33031(a)(4): "The existence of subdivided lots of irregular form and
shape and inadequate size for proper usefulness and development that are in multiple
ownership."
This condition of blight is also present in the Project Area. The ownership pattern of
land in the Project Area is exceedingly diverse and such small ownership pattern indicates that
land assembly by private property owners has not occurred. It is likely that given all the other
burdens affecting the Project Area, and the comparative ease for commercial businesses and
buyers of property to select other less challenged and newer areas of the community for
investment, that the assembly of small parcels into larger parcels of developable land in the
Project Area is not reasonably likely to occur without redevelopment assistance in one form or
another.
In view of the information set forth in the Section 33352 Report the Commission hereby
finds that the condition of blight described in CRL Section 33031(a)(4) is present in the Project
Area and is a prevalent and substantial condition which causes a reduction and lack of utilization
of the Project Area and substantially contributes to a serious physical and economic burden on
the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private
enterprise or government action, or both without redevelopment.
CRL Section 33031(b)(1): "Depreciated or stagnant property values or impaired
investments, including, but not necessarily limited to, those properties containing
hazardous wastes that require the use of agency authority as specified in Article 12.5
(commencing with Section 33459)."
2]
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4825-3864-2432.1
-8-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resolutions\2004\04-08-] 6 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
This symptom of blight is present in the Project Area. Despite recent news reports and
general views about rising real estate investment values in the Inland Empire and in San
Bernardino in particular, the Project Area appears to be an area ofthe community which has not
benefited from these generally favorable economic conditions in recent years. In part of fact,
since the time when the Project Area was established in 1986 a serious and sustained series of
negative economic factors have produced an almost "perfect storm" of adverse economic
conditions in the Project Area. The economic down-turn of the late 1980's and early '90s,
coupled with the closing of the nearby Santa Fe railway locomotive repair shop facility and the
closing of nearby Norton Air Force Base have resulted in a major exodus of commercial
business activity from the Project Area since 1986.
As is readily apparent in the Section 33352 Report, as well as apparent to an untrained
observer who merely takes a drive through the Project Area, virtually no new development or
construction activity since 1986, is apparent in the Project Area today. In light of the large
number of vacant parcels ofland available in the Project Area, this fact is particularly significant
and indicative of this economic condition of blight.
The Section 33352 Report provides a good summary of the available evidence of the
existence of stagnant and depreciated property values which serve to illustrate this problem:
"In order to examine the economic health of the Project Area, trends in secured property
values, which include the land and improvement values, were analyzed for the fiscal
years 1998-99 through 2002-03. The Project Area assessed values increased by 1.37%
annually during this period. The secured assessed value for the City increased by 1.79%
annually from 1998-99 through 2002-03.
A more detailed, analysis by San Bernardino County Assessor's Parcel Map Book and
Page of the Project Area assessed values revealed that despite the slow growth in the
value of the entire Project Area, many blocks actually declined and did not keep pace
with the Proposition 13 inflationary adjustment, due to declining market values. The
analysis revealed that parcels on 16 map book pages declined in value and in addition to
this, parcels on 15 more map book pages did not grow by the Proposition 13 inflationary
adjustment rate of2%. These 31 pages represent 54% of the total Project Area's blocks."
[See Section 33352 Report Table B-6]
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4825-3864-2432.1
-9-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resolutions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDCj2004-26
2
3
4
5
6
In view of the information set forth in the Section 33352 Report the Commission hereby
finds that the condition of blight described in CRL Section 33031 (b)(1) is present in the Project
Area and is a prevalent and substantial condition which causes a reduction and lack of utilization
of the Project Area and substantially contributes to a serious physical and economic burden on
the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private
enterprise or government action, or both without redevelopment.
CRL Section 33031(b)(2): "Abnormally high business vacancies, abnormally low
lease rates, high turnover rates, abandoned buildings, or excessive vacant lots within an
area developed for urban use and served by utilities."
This symptom of blight is present in the Project Area. The photographs and the Section
33352 Report portray a number of vacant commercial use structures in the Project Area. The
number of vacant and under utilized commercial buildings particularly along Highland Avenue
is quite noticeable to the casual observer. In addition, the unusually high percentage of vacant
parcels in the Project Area provides evidence that this condition of blight exists.
In view of the information set forth in the Section 33352 Report the Commission hereby
finds that the condition of blight described in CRL Section 3303 1 (b)(2) is present in the Project
Area and is a prevalent and substantial condition which causes a reduction and lack of utilization
of the Project Area and substantially contributes to a serious physical and economic burden on
the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private
enterprise or government action, or both without redevelopment.
CRL Section 33031(b)(4): "Residential overcrowding or an excess of bars, liquor
stores, or other businesses that cater exclusively to adults, that has led to problems of
public safety and welfare."
This symptom of blight is present in the Project Area. Residential overcrowding is a
significant problem and one which is not likely to improve without redevelopment. Although
the sustained efforts of City code enforcement have produced very positive results in the Project
Area, government action alone cannot remedy the problem in the near term. The investment of
private capital is required to address the problem of residential overcrowding. Given the extent
of blighting conditions in the Project Area, it is unfortunately not surprising that the investment
of private capital in the Project Area since 1986 has not made much of an improvement since the
time the Project Area was established. This is confirmed by the finding under CRL Section
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4825-3864-2432.1
-10-
P:\AgendasIResolutionslResolutions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
33032(a)(3), above. Furthermore, the presence of so-called "adult business" activities in the
Project Area, such as on Highland Avenue, provides evidence of the persistent and adverse
nature ofthese conditions of blight. [Section 33352 Report B-29 and B-30]
In view of the information set forth in the Section 33352 Report the Commission hereby
finds that the condition of blight described in CRL Section 33031(b)(4) is present in the Project
Area and is a prevalent and substantial condition which causes a reduction and lack of utilization
of the Project Area and substantially contributes to a serious physical and economic burden on
the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private
enterprise or government action, or both without redevelopment.
CRL Section 33031(b)(5): "A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the
public safety and welfare."
This symptom of blight is present in the Project Area. [Section 33352 Report B-26
through B-30.]
In view of the information set forth in the Section 33352 Report the Commission hereby
finds that the condition of blight described in CRL Section 33031(b)(5) is present in the Project
Area and is a prevalent and substantial condition which causes a reduction and lack of utilization
of the Project Area and substantially contributes to a serious physical and economic burden on
the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by private
enterprise or government action, or both without redevelopment.
(b) In view of the information set forth in the Section 33352 Report the Commission
hereby finds that the conditions of blight described in CRL Section 33031 are present in the
Project Area and that these conditions are prevalent and substantial conditions which cause a
reduction and lack of utilization of the Project Area and substantially contribute to a serious
physical and economic burden on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be
reversed or alleviated by private enterprise or government action, or both without
redevelopment.
(c) The Commission hereby further finds that the 2004 Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan shall assist the Agency to correct and eliminate the spread of blight in the
Project Area by means of assisting owner participants and third party developers under the terms
of specific redevelopment agreements and covenants acceptable to the Agency to consolidate
4825-3864-2432.1
-11-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resolutions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
parcels, eliminate obsolete or blighted structures or conditions on commercial use property and
preserve and create new employment and private capital investment in the Project Area.
SECTION 5. The Commission hereby acknowledges its receipt and approval of the
33352 Report. The Commission hereby requests the Common Council to consider and approve
the 33352 Report in the form as submitted at the joint public hearing for the adoption of the
2004 Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan.
SECTION 6. The Commission hereby acknowledges its receipt of a document entitled
"Written Responses and Findings to Written and Oral Objections Received Prior to or at the July
19, 2004, Joint Public Hearings for the Amended and Restated Redevelopment Plan for the
Central City North Project Area and for the Amendment to the Uptown Redevelopment Project
Area Plan" (the "Written Responses and Findings") and the Commission hereby approves and
adopts the responses and findings contained therein in connection with the adoption of the 2004
Amendment to he Redevelopment Plan. The Commission hereby requests the Common Council
to approve and adopt the Written Responses and Findings and to overrule each and every written
and oral objection submitted by any person to the adoption of the 2004 Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan. A copy of the Written Responses and Findings is on file with the City
Clerk.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
15
16
17
SECTION 7. The Commission hereby approves and adopts the 2004 Amendment, a
copy of which is on file with the Agency Secretary, and which 2004 Amendment is incorporated
herein by this reference, and the Commission designates the Redevelopment Plan, as amended
by the 2004 Amendment (hereinafter, the "Amended Redevelopment Plan") as the official
redevelopment plan for the Uptown Redevelopment Project subject to the adoption of an
appropriate Ordinance of the Common Council which approves and adopts the 2004
Amendment and the Amended Redevelopment Plan.
SECTION 8. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion
of this Resolution, is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of
any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Resolution. The Commission hereby declares that it would have adopted this
Resolution and each, section subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution,
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4825-3864-2432.1
-12-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resolutions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis COC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
3
4
5
irrespective of the fact that one or more sections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or
portions of this Resolution be declared invalid for any reason.
SECTION 9. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption. The Agency Secretary
shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
III
6 III
7 III
8 III
9
III
10
III
II
III
12
III
13
III
14
III
15
III
16
III
17
III
18
III
19
III
20
21 III
22 III
23 III
24 III
25 III
26 III
27 III
28 III
4825-3864-2432.1 -13-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resolutions\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis COC Reso.doc
CDC/2004-26
2
RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO MAKING FINDINGS
REGARDING CONDITIONS OF BLIGHT IN THE REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA OF THE UPTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT,
APPROVING THE SECTION 33352 REPORT TO THE MAYOR AND
COMMON COUNCIL ON THE 2004 EMINENT DOMAIN AMENDMENT
TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE UPTOWN
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AND APPROVING THE 2004 EMINENT
DOMAIN AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE
UPTOWN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
3
4
5
6
7
8
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the
9
Community Development Commission of the City of San Bernardino at a it. reg.
meeting
10 thereof, held on the 16th day of August ,2004, by the following vote, to wit:
II
12
ABSENT
ABSTAIN
NAYS
AYES
Commission Members
13
x
ESTRADA
LONGVILLE
MCGINNIS
DERRY
KELLEY
JOHNSON
MC CAMMACK
~-;:: t~L
Secr~ .
14
x
15
x
16
x
17
x
18
----1L
19
20
21
22
23
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this I~ fl-i day o.f
August
,2004.
24
25
26
27
28
By:
4825-3864-2432.1 -14-
P:\Agendas\Resolutions\Resol ons\2004\04-08-16 Uptown Blight Analysis CDC Reso.doc