12/08/1986 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ Mr. Byrne said fixed costs were dedicated primarily to the parking requirement of the downtown Urban Renewal District. Because of the lack of surface e parking, structure parking was essential to achieve the density of development called for in the plan, he said. He noted that bonding costs were tied to development and were timed to be paid with taxes generated by development. Mr. Byrne said the Downtown Commission had run a computer model to indicate the most favorable use of existing resources in the event that development should occur later than projected. He said the analysis i ndi cated that financial resources should be held and protected for dedication to development, rather than spent too enthusiastically in early years on pay-as- you-go capital projects. Responding to questions, Mr. Byrne said parking structures were the major expenses, now that land was owned. He also said the bonds were not backed by users, but by tax-increment flow. He said plans were to develop surface parking lots into mixed-use space, and projected parking was expected to offer about three spaces per 1,000 square feet of building area. He said existing expenses were expected to be repaid completely by the yea r 2005. Mr. Byrne said the third page described capital projects that supported the plan objectives and that were too small for bonding. Mr. Holmer asked about the proposal for a $5.2 million public plaza. Mr. Byrne said the project was included in the Downtown Plan as a design concept. He said a site had not been identified, and costs shown were estimates for acquisition and development of open space. He said the 20-year plan was expected to cost about $13 million, which included both the existing Urban Renewal area and the proposed . expansion. Mr. Byrne showed a model of the effect of the Urban Renewal District on tax e rates. He said improvements to the district had raised property tax rates inside the City and the 4J School District by about 60~/$1,000 of assessed value. He said the impact on property taxpayers outside the City but within Lane County would be about 3~/$1,000. He noted that the future projection was conservative and assumed annual tax base growth of 6 percent, with valuation growth of 3 percent. Mr. Byrne said that based on these assumptions, the tax rate at the end of the 20-year period would be $57/$1,000, which he added probably was unrealistic. Mr. Byrne made a correction to his previous statement about the effect of financing the Riverfront Research Park. He said the rate at the termination of the project was shown in the next-to-the-last line of the Summary Report of Marginal Tax Rates. He also noted that benefits from the Riverfront Project would amount to dollars per thousand over a period of several years, not in the first year after termination. Mr. Byrne said State law required that information used in financial analysis of the Renewal Plan be sufficient to determine feasibility. He said the information presented this evening would be condensed for the final report, and any changes that occurred in the future were expected to fall within acceptable ranges for feasibility. e MINUTES--City Council Dinner/Work Session December 8, 1986 Page 3