Yorba Linda's Redevelopment Agency: Here are some interesting, surprising facts for residents

Here are a few interesting--and sometimes surprising--facts about Yorba Linda’s city-run Redevelopment Agency, gleaned from a number of documents presented City Council regarding a $24 million bond sale to pay for Town Center infrastructure improvements.

--Single-family residential development heavily outweighs combined commercial and industrial development in the 2,984-acre project area, created for the city’s east-end in 1983 and amended to include some westside land in 1990.

More than 65 percent of project area property is single-family residential, with the average home price currently estimated at $550,000, down from $800,000 in 2007.

Correspondingly, 66.2 percent of the project area’s $2.1 billion assessed value involves residential development, with commercial at 15.4 percent, industrial (mostly office and research/development) at 12.8 percent and unsecured at 5.6 percent.

The non-contiguous 2,984-acre project area comprises nearly 27 percent of the city’s total 11,125 acres. The eastside “original area” includes 2,640 acres and the westside “amended area” 344 acres.

--Most of the project area’s residential development occurred 1990 to 2000 and includes a large swath of homes in the Hidden Hills area, with about 200 more units built in 2006.

In addition to the single-family homes, the project area’s eastside portion includes Savi Ranch and the nine-acre Bryant Ranch neighborhood center. Assessed value of the east-side residential, business and office areas is about $1.8 billion.

The project area’s westside portion includes the Town Center area and the strip of mainly commercial property running northwest along Imperial Highway approaching the western city limits. Assessed value is about $283 million.

--Assessed value of project area properties in both the eastside and westside areas have increased exponentially since the areas were designated for redevelopment, and it’s the property taxes paid on this huge increase that funds projects, including low-cost housing.

The eastside project area valuation increased from about $17 million in the 1983 base year to more than $1.88 billion for the 2010-11 fiscal year, for a net gain of more than $1.86 billion.

And the westside project area valuation increased from about $90 million in the 1990 base year to more than $283 million in 2010-11, for a gain of more than $193 million.

After doling out “pass through” payments to 19 other taxing agencies that would have normally received a portion of the increased property tax revenue, the agency keeps a yearly income of about $20 million.

--Some project area property owners, including several in Savi Ranch, appealed their assessments, requesting, on average, a 37 percent reduction for the current fiscal year.

Since 2005, 84 of 129 resolved cases resulted in lower assessments. The 65 percent success rate could carry over to 61 pending appeals for 2010-11, 13 for 2009-10 and a handful from prior years.

--By the end of the most recent fiscal year, the agency had collected about $303.6 million from project area property taxes, far short of the $2.8 billion limit. Issued bonds total $77 million, short of the $675 million limit.

The eastside project area expires in 2023 and the westside in 2028. The agency’s final “increment” property taxes will be collected in 2033 in the east and in 2038 in the west.

Town Center Specific Plan raises questions

Let’s take a look at City Council’s latest actions regarding the Old Town area as reflected in the new Town Center Specific Plan. Here are questions and answers based on the Plan, other city documents and longtime observation of local political machinations.

Question: Is Old Town redevelopment likely to actually take place this time?
Answer: Yes, very likely. After decades of surveys, studies and reports, the latest plan has council support and only a few vocal opponents. Political inertia stopped some past proposals, and a high-density 2004-05 “Dieden Plan” was derailed by widespread public opposition. However, a tough economy and adverse retail market forces could stall this year’s drive for a more vibrant downtown.

Q: What are the current cost estimates for a revived Town Center?
A: A total $29.1 million, according to a “Draft Preliminary Opinion of Probable Cost” prepared last November, a figure that includes a $6 million pedestrian bridge across Imperial Highway, a $4.4 million two-story, 300-stall parking facility and $155,000 to demolish the existing library, but no estimate for a new library.

Q: Is a cultural arts facility included?
Not yet. The Specific Plan “assumed a facility with up to 1,200 seats,” termed a “worst-case project scope,” which is perhaps a poor choice of words. But the document notes, “Determination on this question is a public policy matter for [council’s] consideration.”

Of course, expect denials all around, but--frankly--political and personal grudges are enduring features of this city’s council milieu. Some leaders of the Yorba Linda Arts Alliance backed losing candidates in the last two elections, while leaders of the city’s major equestrian group supported the winners. And recriminations abound at council meetings, in blog comments and on Facebook pages.

Q: What is the current status of a pedestrian bridge across Imperial Highway?
A: Council members--all self-described “fiscal conservatives” opposed to “pork” spending--haven’t discarded a bridge idea, which would link the Main Street and Station Shopping Center areas. One cost estimate is $6 million for the structure, with $3.1 million coming from a Congressional “earmark” obtained by Congressman Gary Miller (a Republican!). Ongoing maintenance would be city-funded.

Q: Is multi-family housing planned?
A: Two sites totaling about seven acres are set aside: Altrudy Lane and the “strawberry field” properties on the east side of Lakeview Avenue, with 54 units at 10-units-per-acre or 141 units at 20-units-per-acre. A Jan. 26 city report notes, “The intent . . . is to locate residential units within walking distance of the Town Center in order to develop a critical population mass to support new commercial, retail and restaurant uses.”

Q: Will a Measure B vote be necessary?
A: Measure B requires a public vote on many major land use changes, including boosting density levels beyond 10 units per acre or for heights more than 35 feet.

Q: Is a parking structure needed?
A: The Specific Plan “has been formulated to rely on surface parking for cost reasons,” but “a parking structure would be required” for either 900 or 1,200-seat performing arts venue options. A minimum 238 spaces would be needed for a 1,200-seat site, with 300 spaces costing $4.4 million, according to one estimate by a city consultant.

City seeks low-cost housing in condo complexes

Anyone who has observed even one of this city’s 24 elections for City Council members knows a leading campaign issue since incorporation in 1967 has been housing density—with many residents rightly concerned about retaining Yorba Linda’s semi-rural heritage.

Now, with no vast stretches of land within city limits for new development and a state mandate to identify locations for low-cost housing, a key issue is where to put the 831 lower- and 412 moderate-income units noted as “needs” in a June 2010 city report.

The council, in a 2009 5-0 vote, identified 13 sites for potential 10, 20 and 30 units per acre zoning, 11 on the westside and two in Savi Ranch, but voters defeated a plan to allow 30 units per acre on one of the Savi Ranch sites in a Measure B vote last year.

Measure B requires a public vote on major land use changes, including rezoning that would allow more than 10 units per acre. The Savi Ranch proposal lost by 197 votes.
A majority of westside voters favored the density boost, but eastsiders were opposed.

Fortunately, not all 1,243 lower- and moderate-income units need be new construction, according to a recent report by city Housing and Redevelopment Manager Pam Stoker.

Up to 25 percent, or 207 of the 831 low-income units, can include rehabilitated rental housing, preservation of “at risk” housing and the conversion of existing multi-family housing into affordable units through covenants, under a “committed assistance” plan.

The city already has rehabilitated the 75-unit Linda Gardens Apartments on Plumosa Drive into Villa Plumosa and is considering covenants on the 84 Villa Pacifica senior apartments on Lemon Drive across from the fire station.

The remaining 48 units might be acquired from units for sale, including foreclosures, in five of the city’s existing condominium complexes, four westside and one eastside, based on action at last week’s special council session.

A 5-0 council vote appropriates up to $9 million from Redevelopment Agency funds to purchase not more than 48 units in five identified projects and “any other condominium complex” that might “benefit” from “committed assistance.”

The five designated complexes include The Hills off Via Lomas de Yorba, Yorba Linda Village off Lakeview Avenue south of Yorba Linda Boulevard, Jamestowne on Valley View Avenue south of Imperial Highway, Lakeview Retirement off Lakeview Avenue near Lemon Drive and Rancho Linda at Eureka Avenue and Yorba Linda Boulevard.

Acquisitions would be handled by Evergreen Villas L.P., which administers the 28 units the city has purchased so far in the 52-unit senior condominium complex at the Avocado Avenue intersection with Yorba Linda Boulevard.

After buying units, the Evergreen group will secure affordable covenants on each, which would count toward meeting the state requirements for very low- or low-income housing.

“As is being done with units acquired in the Evergreen Villas complex, the developer rehabilitates the unit with the necessary improvements and repairs, markets the unit as a rental property to a qualified low-income household and agrees to manage the unit as an affordable property in perpetuity,” Stoker’s report explained.

Previously, the city and Yorba Linda Water District agreed to cooperate on developing the vacated district headquarters on Plumosa Drive for more low-cost westside housing.