My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/16/1975
Clerk
>
Minutes
>
SUCCESOR AGENCY(formerly Community Redevelopment Agency)
>
COMMUNTY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (1974-2012)
>
1973-1999
>
1975
>
06/16/1975
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2012 1:15:37 PM
Creation date
3/3/2005 10:45:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Minutes
Date
6/16/1975
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />.. <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />I <br /> <br />RELOCATION CLAIMS <br /> <br />Upon the motion of Mr. Garthe, seconded by Mr. Ward, rental <br />differential payments for displaced tenants at 426 West Second <br />Street and 410 West Second Street were approved unanimously by <br />the Redevelopment Agency. <br /> <br />REPORT ON TAX INCREMENT STATUS AND BUDGET <br /> <br />The Executive Director reported that the financial studies recently <br />completed by Stone and Youngberg showed that we can anticipate <br />approximately $250,000 of tax increment for fiscal year '76. <br />In analyzing the budget status, the Director reported that $150,000 <br />would be available from the general fund, $250,000 from tax incre- <br />ment, and $250,000 from Community Development funds. The proposed <br />tax increment would allow the Agency to anticipate floating a <br />tax increment bond of approximately $2,000,000 within the next <br />six months. Upon the motion of Mr. Ward and seconded by Mr. <br />Garthe, the budget was received by the Redevelopment Agency and <br />forwarded to the City Council. The motion passed unanimously. <br /> <br />SENIOR CITIZENS SITE ASSEMBLAGE <br /> <br />The Executive Director reported to the Agency members that all <br />land acquisition had been completed for the Senior Citizen Hous- <br />ing site located south of Birch Park. Relocation efforts were <br />progressing smoothly and approximatley 17 residents were left <br />to be relocated. It was anticipated that demolition contract <br />would be let by the end of August and the site could then be <br />disposed of by September 30,1975. <br /> <br />OCTD TRANSIT TERMINAL <br /> <br />Schedule on the Orange County Transit District's multi-modal <br />terminal was presented showing that a design architectual con- <br />tract should be awarded by the end of June and that construction <br />on the facility should commence within the next year. <br /> <br />FASHION SQUARE DEVELOPMENT <br /> <br />The Executive Director reported to the Agency that Draper and <br />Kramer were working on the proposal to request an exclusive right <br />to negotiate from the Agency; however, their proposal has not <br />been completed and they have asked for an additional week prior <br />to executing any documents which would set out the time schedule <br />for development of the expanded regional shopping center. Agency <br />members expressed their concern at the delay and urged that a <br />schedule be presented to the Agency as soon as possible. <br /> <br />RELOCATION OF UTILITY LINES <br /> <br />The assemblage of the Senior Citizen Housing site has resulted <br />in the need to relocate gas lines and electric lines. The abandon- <br />ment of the gas line is a result of vacation of Second Street. <br />The Gas Company has estimated the cost of this abandonment and <br />relocation at $3,200. The Edison Company has requested an ease- <br />ment under Second Street and the ability to relocate their lines <br />under Second Street. The estimated cost of the work is $38,000. <br />Neither company will proceed until the Agency authorizes a pur- <br />chase order. Upon The motion of Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Bricken, <br />the Redevelopment Agency approved payment of $3,200 to the Southern <br />California Gas Company and $38,000 to the Southern California <br />Edison Company. The motion passed unanimously. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.