Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR10-Redevelopment Agency FI > RaCYELOPMENT AGENCY-OUEST FOR c::::)MMISSION/COUNCIL AcOoN \ From: Glenda Saul, Executive Director Subject: AMENDMENT OF MC-480 AND MC-48l (ENTERPRISE ZONE ORDINANCE) Dept: Redevelopment Agency Date: July 2, 1986 Synopsis of Previous Commission/Council action: -On November 4, 1985, the Mayor and Common Council approved and adopted Ordinance No. MC-480, establishing incentives to be granted certain businesses and certain residential construction within the Enterprise Zone. -On November 4, 1985, the Mayor and Common Council approved and adopted Ordinance No. MC-48l, establishing incentives to be granted certain businesses and certain residential construction within the Enterprise Zone and declaring the urgency thereof. Recommended motion: (MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL) MOVE TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON AMENDMENTS TO ORDINANCE NUMBERED MC-480 AND MC-48l FOR AUGUST 4, 1986. _~W1U11 G ~6~ Contact person: l!1 AnA:=! ~.A111/11An H,:r.n(lpt"Ann Phone: 383-5081 Supporting data attached: ~hff Rpport Ward: 1.6 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: $ Project: NW. COW. UT. SC. M/CC No adverse Impact on City: Date: Council Notes: Agenda Item No. /0 'CI'IC OF SAN BERNARDIQ) - REQUEO FOR COUNCIL ACQN STAFF REPORT On October 14, 1985, the Mayor and Common Council adopted Resolution No. 85-405 approving the establishment of the City's Infi11 Housing Program and set aside $2 million from the City's 1985 Single Family Mortgage & Revenue Bond Allocation to provide permanent financing for the infi1l homes. Agency staff were directed to develop an infi11 housing program and implementation strategy for council approval. Since that time, the program and implementation strategy has been approved by the Mayor and Common Council. Additionally, staff was recently instructed to develop and issue a request for proposals (RFP) for the purpose of inducing additional developers to participate in the program. (An item elsewhere in the agenda is submitted for your consideration in this regard). During the RFP process, several potential respondents brought it to the attention of staff that the program specified single family dwelling units, whereas a number of vacant parcels that would ordinarily qualify for infi11 assistance are zoned for multifamily construction. This significantly reduces the possibility of development if developers were required to construct single family detached dwelling units on parcels zoned for multifamily development. The Redevelopment Committee has taken the position that if the project otherwise qualifies for infi11 assistance but for the R-1 zoning, the current zoning shall apply. Agency Counsel advises, however, that Ordinance Nos. MC-480 and MC-481 must be amended in order to accomplish multifamily construction in the Infi11 Housing Program (see attached memorandum). In addition to the above housing issue, the Mayor and Common Council has held discussions relating to the appropriate timeframe for incentives approved for the industrial area of the Enterprise Zone. Presently, Ordinance Nos. MC-480 and MC-481 allow for incentives to be provided to businesses in the industrial area during the first year of operation. This incentive is available for the life of the Zone. There has been discussion that it was the intent of the Council to limit the incentive to the first four (4) years of the life of the Zone. Staff recommends Ordinance Nos. MC-480 and MC-48l be amended to allow for multifamily infi11 construction and to limit incentives in the industrial area to four (4) years, rather than the life of the Zone, as is currently the case. 7$.0264 1185L 7/2/86 - - . C(:ITY OF SAN BE~ARDINO Q... MEMORANDU~ To Kenneth J. Henderson Community Development Manager From Allen R. Briggs Sr. Asst. City Attorn. June 24, 1986 Su bject Date In-fill Housing Covering MUlti-family Units Approved Date 770.9a I have reviewed the prov~s~ons of San Bernardino Municipal Code Section 3.l8.030(f}, relating to in-fill housing, which section was adopted in Ordinance No. MC-480 and MC-48l. San Bernardino Municipal Code Section 3.l8.030(f} reads as follows: "'In-fill housing' as used in this chapter is single-family home construction built on vacant lots in neighborhoods existing at the time of adoption of this chapter, or built on lots where existing structures are demolished or removed for the construction of single-family homes." I have also reviewed the school impaction resolution relating to the San Bernardino Unified School District, being City of San Bernardino Resolution No. 85-337, adopted August 19, 1985. Similar resolutions have been adopted as to the Colton, Rialto and Redlands school districts, I understand. Sections 9 and 11 of that resolution read, in pertinent part, as follows: "Section 9. Exemptions. The provisions of this Resolution shall not apply where the residential development is: A. Construction of single dwelling units pursuant to the City Infill Housing Program for single residences upon an existing lot of record. . . .ft "Section 11. Amendment or Repeal of this Resolution. The Mayor and Common Council may add, amend or repeal any provisions of this resolution or the whole thereof, upon thirty (30) days oral or written notice to the School District." Accordingly, neither the resolution nor the ordinance presently provide for exemptions from the school impaction fees for multi-family housing built on existing lots even in existing neighborhoods. The ordinance and resolution both apply only to single family dwellings. elry ON rH~::JtII~V. . " c c ,.) ') . Kenneth J. Henderson June 24, 1986 Page Two Both the ordinance and resolution could be amended, but you should note that the amendment of the resolution requires thirty days oral or written notice to the School District. Presumably, that would give them an opportunity to come in and be heard before the Mayor and Common Council. I recommend that if we seek to amend the ordinance and resolution, we give each affected School District advance notice of the first hearing on the ordinance, at a minimum, and that the resolution be proffered to the Council at that time, for consideration, but not to take effect until the ordinance takes effect, which would give the full thirty days notice to the School Districts. If I can be of assistance, please let me know. &dn~ ALLEN R. BRIGGS Sr. Asst. City Attorney ARB:nb