CC Minutes - 10/16/06 Public Hearing
City of Eugene
CC Minutes - 10/16/06 Public Hearing
6/9/2010 10:32:02 AM
11/17/2006 2:24:39 PM
City Council Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
All rights reserved.
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 plain text
<br />In regard to annexation, Ms. Cuellar pointed out that some land, such as agricultural land, had a density <br />lower than R-1. There were many such properties outside the city limits and inside the urban growth <br />boundary (UGB). She said that such properties did not sell at the price of agricultural land; the market <br />value of such a property was the same if zoned agricultural or R-1 because sellers of such properties knew <br />the intended use. Using the Tax Assessor’s Market Value might not represent true market value in such <br />cases at all. <br /> <br />Ms. Cuellar asked that the record remain open for two weeks. <br /> <br />Ms. Cuellar suggested local adoption of such an ordinance could be an impediment to discussions statewide. <br />Portland was discussing a value-added tax to pay for infrastructure in areas where the boundaries were <br />expanded because of a lack of funding for services in those areas. <br /> <br />Jim Welsh <br />, 2139 Centennial Plaza, representing the Eugene Association of Realtors, expressed concern <br />about the impact of the ordinance on the costs of development and affordable housing. He believed that the <br />ordinance creating the fee was a new land use ordinance under the definition of land use ordinance in Ballot <br />Measure 37 and could create a whole new class of Ballot Measure 37 claimants. The council was <br />contemplating a 25 percent devaluation of private real property upon any annexation, zone change, or Metro <br />Plan redesignation. The regulatory reduction of value immediately occurs when owner was required to <br />deposit 25 percent of the value of his development before the development process could occur. <br /> <br />Mr. Welch said that imposing the fee would increase the cost of housing. He did not think the fee was <br />needed because the City had not received a large number of Ballot Measure 37 claims and there was only <br />three months remaining before the deadline for filing claims through the courts. Property owners will <br />consider the charge excessive and unfair. The market evaluation process was fraught with pitfalls because <br />of the ever-changing market. He asked how Ballot Measure 5 and 50 related to the tax. He asked if the <br />charge did not represent double-taxation. Those he spoke to believed that it was. Mr. Welch said that the <br />ordinance would have a further dampening effect on development in Eugene. <br /> <br />th <br />John Lauch <br />, 715 West 4 Avenue, representing Eugene School District 4J, said the district believed that the <br />proposed ordinance would result in lost revenue to the school district if adopted as drafted. The district had <br />been experiencing significant declining enrollment over the last nine years, resulting in the need to <br />consolidate and close schools. The district was disposing of such sites and he anticipated it would dispose <br />of more in the future. Four sites that had been sold recently were still in public ownership or were now <br />owned by a nonprofit agency providing quasi public uses. The district’s Santa Clara property was currently <br />in escrow with a private developer and the property would require a zone change for the change in <br />ownership to occur. The property value could be greatly enhanced by the zone change, which was reflected <br />in the offer made to the school district. Under school board policy, revenues generated by such sales were <br />first directed to the improvement of other district facilities. The ordinance would have a significant impact <br />on revenues to the district and would impair improvement and upgrade efforts at existing school facilities. <br /> <br />Mr. Lauch submitted written testimony. <br /> <br />th <br />Rob Zako <br />, 1280-B East 20 Avenue, representing 1000 Friends of Oregon, concurred with the request to <br />keep the record open. He said that according to Portland State University, one of 11 acres of farmland in <br />the Willamette Valley was subject to a Ballot Measure 37 claim. Mr. Zako said it was “perhaps unfortu- <br />nate” that subdivisions were being built next to farms, precluding those farms from operating, and rock <br /> <br /> <br />MINUTES—Eugene City Council October 16, 2006 Page 2 <br /> Public Hearing <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.