Loading...
Res 04-089 RESOLUTION NO. 04- 089 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY ADOPTING WRITTEN RESPONSES TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS TO THE 2004 AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PAGUAY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of poway ("City Council") has adopted, by Ordinance No. 117 on December 13, 1983, the Redevelopment Plan ("Plan") for the Paguay Redevelopment Project ("Project"); and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted amendments to the Plan by Ordinance No. 415 on June 15, 1993, Ordinance No. 439 on December 13, 1994, Ordinance No. 593 on December 2,2003, and Ordinance No. 605 on August 17, 2004; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received from the Poway Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") a proposed amendment to the Plan ("2004 Amendment"), a copy of which is on file at the office of the City Clerk, together with the Agency's Report to City Council including the reasons for the 2004 Amendment; and WHEREAS, on September 28, 2004, the Agency and City Council held a joint public hearing, duly noticed and held in accordance with applicable law, on the proposed 2004 Amendment; and WHEREAS, at or prior to the time of the joint public hearing, the City Council received one written objection to the adoption of the 2004 Amendment, which written objection was contained in a letter dated September 28, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Law requires that prior to the adoption of a redevelopment plan amendment that the City Council respond in writing to any written objections received by adopting written responses to the written objections; and WHEREAS, following the closure of the September 28, 2004, joint public hearing of the Agency and City Council, the proposed approval of the Negative Declaration prepared in connection with the 2004 Amendment and the proposed adoption of the 2004 Amendment were continued to the October 12, 2004, Agency and City Council meetings, to permit the preparation of written responses to the written objections, and comments made by the public at the public hearing, and to allow the City Council to first consider and evaluate the written objections and to consider the adoption of written responses to the written objections and public comments; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed, evaluated, and fully considered the Report to City Council prepared by the Agency in connection with the 2004 Amendment and submitted to the City Council and all other oral and written staff reports and information presented, all evidence and testimony for and against the adoption of the 2004 Amendment, and all objections to the adoption of the 2004 Amendment, including the written objections; and WHEREAS, written responses to the written objections and public comments received to the 2004 Amendment have been prepared and have been fully reviewed, evaluated, and considered by the City Council. Resolution No. 04.089 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Poway as follows: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Poway has reviewed, evaluated, and fully considered the written objections and other public comments to the 2004 Amendment received at or prior to the joint public hearing, which objections are set forth in Exhibit "A" hereto, and the City Council hereby finds and determines that such objections are without merit and are hereby overruled for the reasons set forth in the written responses to these written objections and other public comments also set forth in Exhibit "A" hereto. The written responses included in Exhibit "A" are hereby adopted as the written findings of the City Council in response to the written objections and other public comments received. All oral and written objections to the 2004 Amendment received at or prior to the joint public hearing are hereby overruled. Section 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit, by pre-paid First Class Mail, a certified copy of this Resolution, including Exhibit "A," to each person who has submitted a written objection or provided comments at the public hearing, at their respective addresses. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of at a regular meeting this 12th day of October, 2004. STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )SS COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) I, Jeanne Bunch, Interim City Clerk of the City of Poway, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Resolution No. 04-089 was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Poway at its regular meeting held on the 12th day of October 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: GOLDBY, HIGGINSON, REXFORD,CAFAGNA NOES: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE ABSENT: EMERY Jea e Bunch, Interim City Clerk Cit of Poway Resolution No. 04-089 Page 3 EXHIBIT "A" WRITTEN OBJECTIONS AND WRITTEN RESPONSES TO THE WRITTEN OBJECTIONS TO THE 2004 AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PAGUAY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 1. Written Objection from Anna M. Pinto, dated September 28,2004 This letter objects to extension of the Redevelopment Agency's eminent domain authority. The letter references that that the Agency does not have nor is it proposed to have eminent domain authority on residential zoned and developed properties. The letter suggests that the Redevelopment Agency has already decided where eminent domain will be used for purchasing properties or condemning properties to move forward with improvement projects that only the City and special interest groups feel necessary to support. Reference is also made to the purchase of properties for the girls' softball fields near Aubrey and Midland. ReSDonse to written comment: Mrs. Pinto correctly states that the Agency does not have the authority to acquire residential zoned and developed properties. The 2004 Plan Amendment would not expand the existing eminent domain authority; rather the Plan Amendment would only extend the existing authority for an additional twelve years. While it is suggested that the Redevelopment Agency has already decided on future properties, the Agency has not taken any steps toward acquisition of real property by eminent domain under its existing authority. Prior to any proposed use of eminent domain, the Agency would be required by Law to make an offer to the property owner, based upon the appraised value of the property, negotiate with the property owner, conduct a hearing, and adopt a resolution of necessity by a four-fifths vote of the Agency Board, in accordance with the requirements of California law. The author objects to the eminent domain extension; however, her property is residential property and is not subject to eminent domain action by the Redevelopment Agency. Resolution No. 04- 089 Page 4 2. Speaker- Carol Funk, 11319 Creek Road, Poway Mrs. Funk inquired about her personal residence, referenced as open space. ResDonse to Mrs. Funk: The actual zoning designation of Mrs. Funk's property is "Open Space - 1 Dwelling Unit." This is a land use designation intended as an area for very low- density, single-family residential development. The eminent domain exemption is for "residentially-zoned and developed properties." Because the zoning authorizes residential uses and the residential unit has been developed, Mrs. Funk is not subject to eminent domain at her property on Creek Road and will be advised of this determination in writing. 3. Speaker - Mr. East, 16067 Highland Valley East Mr. East inquired if this action will have any impact on properties along Rattlesnake Creek. ResDonse to Mr. East: Mr. East was advised that the proposed 2004 Redevelopment Plan Amendment has no impact on residential zoned and used property.