HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA ACQUI. OF PROPERTY 5-19-80DATE:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
~ay 19~ 1980
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
No. 4
5-19-80
Inter-Corn
Redevelopment Agency Chairman and Agency Members via Dan Blankenship,
Executive Director
Community Development Department
Old Town Tusfin Task Force--Acquisition of Property
Among the topics of considerafionbeforethe task force have been the acquisition
of property and the provision of future public parking in the old town area.
There is a void in clear cut Agency policy toward the use of condemnation powers
to acquire property. It was }hought by some task force members that the original
formation of the redevelopment project area involved a policy fo not pursue any
forced relocation of businesses or residents or a condemnation opposed by the
property owners. However, no clear Cut poi'icy statement in that regard has
been discovered by staff.
A proposal for a possible negotiated purchase of four lots (147' x 50' each) at
the northwest corner of Second and Prospect was suggested by a downtown property
owner, John Prescott. The property is currently in an estate (Mitchell) which
is in dispute; has substandard structures; and might be suitable for development
for downtown parking. Discussion of land value show6d that a major state of
flux in land prices currently exists in the area. It was recommended that prior
to any purchase, an appraisal and feasibility study needed to be conducted.
If is staff's view fhaf the property's value for permanent parking facilities is
not as strong as ifs acquisition for possible resale for corrmercial development
in conjunction with lots fronting on El Camino Real. Staff would estimate cur-
rent land values at $16-18 per square foot for office development. That would
put the price of one 50' x 147' lot at about $125,000 or a half million dollars
for four lots. Asking prices on parcels have ranged over $20/sq. it.
If the four lots in the north part of downtown were used for parking, if might
create pressure for acquisition and development of a similar facility south of
Main Street or in other downtown locations. Undoubfedlyt the Agency would be
forced fo use condemnation at some date if an active acquisition and parking de-
velopment program is pursued. Other properties which might be suitable would be
on nC", Prospect,&nd Sixfh¢ immediately abutting lots with Main Street or
El Camino Real frontage.
Staff would see more value to pursue such acquisitions, if indeed they are pur-
sued, fo acquire the properties for resale to developers rather than removing
them from the fax rolls fo be used as parking lots. A preferable alternative
would be use of the 0.524 acre parcel owned by the school district on the west
side of "C" Street south of Second Street for public parking. If has the ad-
vantages of (a) serving a double use for downtown and park parking facilities,
(b) already being zoned P&I and not on the tax ro¢ls, and (c) perhaps not in-
volving any condemnation procedures. Depending on State legislative impact on
the sale of school properties, a lease with option for future acquisition or
exchange of property might be developed. Of course, all this is speculative
Redevelopment Agency
May 19, 1980
page 2.
until explored further with the school district.
A. Policy on Eminent Domain
It would appear that the first order of Agency business would be to adopt a clear
statement of policy giving both the task force and staff a guideline fo structure
proposals or recommendations. The followin9 alternative statement may serve as
a guide for such a policy determination.
"It is (is pofl Agency policy to pursue condemnation of property or
leases to achieve elimination of blight and consolidation of properties
for purposes of resale for new development in the project area."
The Agency may put any number of stipulations on such a policy, if adopted,
Favoring such use of fha Agency's power of eminent domain. However, such stipu-
lations might be better left to a case by case review of such possible eminent
domain actions brought before the Agency.
B. Budget Priorities
A favorable policy on use of eminent domain fo acquire property may affect already
planned expenditure activities for capital improvements in the project area. This
would especially be true if the properties acquired were retained and put fo a
public purpose, e.g. parking lots. Staff would recommend that the Agency not re-
fain such properties, but pass them through fo developers fo recoup acquisition
expenditures, thus leaving capital improvement priorities relatively unaffected.
This would require that staff present, simultaneously with an acquisition proposal,
a signed developer agreement for the subject property. Part of a developer agree-
menf could include amount of public parking, retention of airspace rights over
parking areas for future structures or other provisions fo expand available park-
ing facilities.
C. Public Parking -
Staff would recommend that the Agency direct that possible use of the school
district site on "C" Street for parkin9 be researched and discussed with school
district staff with a report fo be made back fo the Agency.
MWB: rnm