HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgreement A-17-522 with City of Reedley.pdf 17-1045 Agreement No. 17-522
1 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED
2 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN
3 THE COUNTY OF FRESNO AND THE CITY OF REEDLEY
4
5 This First Amendment to the Amended and Restated Memorandum of Understanding
6 ("First Amendment"), executed on this 26th day of September , 2017, (the "Effective
7 Date"), by and between the County of Fresno, a political subdivision of the State of California
8 (hereinafter referred to as "County") and the City of Reedley, a municipal corporation of the
9 State of California (hereinafter referred to as "City"). County and City are each a "Party" to this
10 First Amendment and are sometimes collectively referred to as "the Parties" to this First
11 Amendment.
12 RECITALS:
13 WHEREAS, the Parties previously entered into a comprehensive agreement covering
14 development, annexations, sales taxes, property taxes, redevelopment and other matters,
15 which is entitled "Amended and Restated Memorandum of Understanding Between the County
16 of Fresno, the City of Reedley, and the Reedley Redevelopment Agency," dated October 03,
17 2006, (hereinafter "MOU"); and
18 WHEREAS, as of February 1, 2012, the Reedley Redevelopment Agency ("SRA")
19 automatically dissolved pursuant to ABx1 26, any remaining functions of the SRA were
20 assumed by the City of Reedley acting as the Successor Agency, and the SRA is no longer a
21 party to the MOU;
22 WHEREAS, it has become apparent to the Parties that a First Amendment to the MOU
23 is necessary and desirable to accommodate streamlining in the annexation process and
24 changes in the patterns of new urban growth and development that the City is experiencing as
25 it regulates and facilitates the build-out of its Sphere of Influence (SOI); and
26 WHEREAS, the City has notified the County of its desire to expand its SOI to include
27 approximately 120 acres of unincorporated areas generally located at the northwest and
28 northeast corners of the intersection of South and Frankwood Avenues, and on the north side
Page 1 of 4
1 of Manning Avenue between Buttonwillow and Englehart Avenues (collectively, the "SOI
2 Expansion"); and
3 WHEREAS, the City has further notified the County of its desire to modify Exhibit 1 of
4 the MOU in an effort to streamline annexations by the City;
5 WHEREAS, the City has determined that the area proposed for expansion includes
6 critical land uses that would provide for orderly growth that ensures services are available and
7 a high quality of life for both current County residents and future City residents; and
8 WHEREAS, the County concurs that the proposed SOI Expansion would positively
9 contribute to the unification of logical urban growth and efficient delivery of urban services
10 within the City and the City's SOI; and
11 WHEREAS, the County has evaluated proposed text amendments to Exhibit 1 of the
12 MOU and agrees to the proposed amendments; and
13 WHEREAS, the parties recognize that this First Amendment to the MOU is necessary to
14 accommodate the proposed expansion of the City's SOL
15 NOW, THEREFORE, County and City hereby agrees to amend the MOU as
16 follows:
17 AMENDMENT I TO MOU
18 The MOU is amended as follows:
19 1. Section 2.4 of the MOU is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:
20 "For the purpose of promoting economic development and job creation, an
21 Alternate Standard for Annexation for industrial or regional commercial uses is
22 hereby created. In the place of the Standards for Annexation set forth in Exhibit
23 1, the Alternate Standard for Annexation shall apply to and govern the review of
24 annexation proposals for industrial or regional commercial uses. Annexation
25 proposals for industrial/regional commercial uses shall include a conceptual
26 development plan, as described herein. The conceptual development plan shall
27 consist of the economic objectives to be achieved, the service and financing
28 strategy and its schedule, and shall include a map of the proposed prezoning.
Page 2 of 4
1 The conceptual development plan's schedule shall include milestones for major
2 project components to measure the progress of the project. Due to the
3 complexity of such projects the development schedule for planning and
4 implementation may reasonably require a period of from five to ten years. The
5 annexation proposal shall be submitted to and reviewed by the County pursuant
6 to Section 2.2. Annexation proposals that comply with the criteria of this Section
7 2.4 shall be deemed to comply with Section 2.1. The annexation application to be
8 submitted to LAFCo shall be considered complete upon adoption of the
9 prezoning by the City. County and City agree to meet annually to review the
10 progress toward the achievement of the economic development objectives and to
11 identify ways to promote mutual economic development objectives. The
12 proposed annexation shall not create an island and shall minimize creation of
13 peninsulas and corridors, or other distortion of boundaries.
14 2. "Revised Exhibit 1" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference,
15 shall replace "Exhibit 1" to the MOU as of the Effective Date of this First
16 Amendment.
17 3. The maps included as Revised Exhibit "3-A" and Revised Exhibit "3-B", attached
18 hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, shall replace Exhibits "3-A" and
19 "3-B" to the MOU as of the Effective Date of this First Amendment.
20 4. Unless expressly modified by the terms of this First Amendment, all other terms
21 of the MOU remain in full force and effect.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 3 of 4
1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this First Amendment, on
2 the date set forth above.
3 COUNTY OF FRESNO, a Political CITY OF REEDLEY, a Municipal
Subdivision of the State of California Corporation of the State of California
4 ("County") ("City")
5
By: L By- &
6 Chairman, Board of Supervisors Mayor, City of Reedley
7
8 ATTEST: ATTEST:
9 Bernice E. Seidel Sylvia Plata
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors City Clerk, City of Selma
10
11 By: By:
12 Deputy Sylviaoata, City Clerk
13 REVIEWED AND RECOMMENDED REVIEWED AN ECOMMENDED FOR
14 FOR APPROVAL- APPRO L:
15
16 4. " By:
M. Rousseau NicoleB4eba, City Manager
17 ty Administrative Officer
18
REVIEWED AND RECOMM DED APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
19 FOR APPROVAL Scott Cross, City Attorney, City of Reedley
20
21 By: By:
Steven E. Whi e, irector tcott Cross, City Attorney
22 Department of Public Works and Planning
23
24 APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM: APPROVED AS TO ACCOUNTING FORM:
Daniel C. Cederborg, County Counsel Oscar J. Garcia, CPA
25 Auditor-Controller/Treasurer-Tax Collector
26
By :— By:
27 Deputy Deputy
28
Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT 1
STANDARDS FOR ANNEXATION
• The proposal must be consistent with the adopted sphere of Influence of the city and not
conflict with the goals and policies of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Act.
• The proposal must be consistent with city general and specific plans, including adopted
goals and policies.
• Pursuant to CEQA, the proposal must mitigate any significant adverse effect on continuing
agricultural operations on adjacent properties, to the extent reasonable and consistent with
the applicable general and specific plan.
• A proposal for annexation is acceptable if one of the following conditions exist:
1. There is existing substantial development provided the City confines its area requested
to that area needed to include the substantial development and create logical
boundaries.
2. Development exists that requires urban services which can be provided by the City.
3. If no development requiring urban services exists, at least 25% of the area proposed for
annexation has:
a) Approved tentative subdivision map (single-family residential)
b) Approved site plan (for other uses including multi-family)
4. The annexation is to fulfill the city's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)
obligation which otherwise cannot be accommodated on lands currently within the city's
incorporated boundary.
• The proposal would not create islands. Boundaries must ultimately minimize creation of
peninsulas and corridors, or other distortion of boundaries.
For any of the following circumstances listed below, a proposal for annexation is presumed to
comply with all standards for annexation:
• The request for annexation is by a city for annexation of its own publicly-owned property for
public use.
• The request for annexation is by a city in order to facilitate construction of public
improvements or public facilities which otherwise could not be constructed.
• The request for annexation is to remove an unincorporated island, substantially surrounded
area, or otherwise address existing peninsulas and/or irregular boundaries.
• The annexation is intended to mitigate or otherwise comply with standards/conditions
required by another agency with respect to another development annexation.
Rev.September 2017
Revised Exhibit 3-A
w
u�n�n�iuu�u
SDU HAVE CITY OF
INN Mn Incorporated: 1913
LU
REEDLEY SOI Adopted: 8/27/1977
SOI Updated: 9/05/2012
PAR IE AV Map Date: December 2015
i w
Q
o
O CEIJTRALAVE
ANNING AVEr.` ��i�^I�� Y
i z
<7 >1 W.
w
W Qj Q
W�uu�u W
Q
0
U) GOODFELLO AVE 0O
NMe
O Yzz
W LL
O
Q
EDIA E o
w
MERICAN AVE
?y�►� 3 Miles North of the City Limits
HUNTSMAN AVE
16 0 0.25 0.5 1
Miles
o
N
L RAL A F eS niin
Tulare County W ; E
0 0.5 1 2 S
Miles
Legend FRESNO LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION Sphere Area 4,760 Acres
CITY OF REEDLEY SPHERE OF INFLUENCE y
Sphere of Influence City
Area 3,457 Acres
City Limits
1■i1
j11 : i
I11�
Legend
�� - • . -
_ ■
� III�I■I�1 wu
��,�� .. Irk �1.■1�
-�� IIf.11��■�
Reedley City Limit
i.
_ AMENlow
�111 11
IWE
1 .
1 1�
1 .� ♦ ��r� ., MW�■�■�
MEN
J ■®
■�IIIII . .
_ . 11111 '� ■�11 �i■�11�
- _ = 1111 •� �■ III
■1.
■1�1 , -�