05/05/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. the fees were added into the mortgage cost they became roughly two-thirds more than could be paid directly. She directed the Council's attention to a table of increased interest rates attached to the outline and said it was designed to demonstrate the advantage of Bancrofting at reduced rates over a shorter priod of time than being absorbed into a mortgage paid over a longer period of time at a higher rate. Mrs. Niven recognized the providion for CIR housing in the proposed schedule but said there was not very much con- struction going into that type of housing. So it would appear there could be help,in eq~alizing costs to the advantage of lower-income households. She suggested possibility of limiting PUDs to a value equal to 80% of the average value for the year prior, noting that cost of single-family homes rose 18% in the last year. She said she was calling these things to the Council's attention, urging them to look for a way of rebating fees at some point, perhaps when building permits were issued, to help reduce the cost for people trying to build for low-income households. Lael Braymer, 2545 West 23rd Avenue, read a prepared statement from the League of Women, Voters, urging that revision 'of planning fees more nearly reflected the cost to the-city for services delivered, and that those b~nefiting from the services should pay the cost rather than its being an obligation of the general public. John Boyer, Associated General Contractors, reported their people had met with staff as requested in committee, He explained their request for creation of a study committee was to bring out details about which they were concerned - the effect of limiting cost of planning to those contractors building inside the city, how construction cost wo~ld be passed on, cost of appeals, PUD,fees, etc. 'e Speaking to those concerns were Stu Burge, Route 2, Box 250A; Lloyd Bond, architect and planner, 1637 Oak Street; Bill Briot, Eugene-Springfield Home Builders, 308 East 50th Avenue. Mr. Burge said the increased cost of planning was the result of attempt by developers to propose larger, more refined, and more comprehensive developments and the active part played in the planning process by concerned individuals, neighborhood groups, ,and the, com- munity as a whole. He felt the tax base should subsidize the planning effot because the citizenry as a whole drived the benefit. If the developer was to be considered the sole beneficiary, then the costs would have to be passed on to the consumer. He recognized the problem of finding additional revenues to meet the costs of growth but felt it would be, an easier task with strong support which could be gained from referring the fees to a . small, workable committee for refinement of a proper procedure for assessment of propot,'- ti~nately fair charge both to the applicant and to the community.' e Mr. Bond felt a committee study of the fees might develop methods for streamlining or im- proving planning services, thereby expediting processing of applications and reducing staff. He noted the method used in establishing the proposed fees - reviewing all staff costs . dur~ng the past year on various matters pass through the planning department. This would inc~ude time spent on appeals, either by the proponent or opponent to a particular action, the ~cost of which he felt should be borne by the appellant. Projects on which there were no appeals' should not be penalized by those on which decisions were appealed. He urged further study before adoption of the fees, claiming the planning process was becoming too costiy, particularly in PUD processing, for the small developer to absorb. Mr. Briot called attention to the increasing cost of construction under PUD regulations and cited fees in Eugene compared ,to those in other cities in Oregon. The Association, he said, felt that although construction under planned unit development procedures was of benefit to the community as a whole the cost was becoming prohibitive - as much as $8,575 in fees on a large PUD of 30 a~res containing 180 units. He said the proposed increase was considerably higher than necessary and would discourage use of PUD procedures,. He supported the recom- mendation of the AGC for further studies before action was taken. Mr. Boyer commented that builders having to pay an unfair amount of development costs in fees and the increasing restrictions placed on the builders would call for measurement of productivity of the planning department. He suggested making professional planners, both private and public, a part of the suggested study committee which could determine where the costs should fall. He noted the need for quick action because of budget concerns and said the industry people were ready to give the matter consideration with planning depart- ment people. e Darrell Smith, 250 Country Club Road, chairman of a committee appointe~ by the Southwest Oregon Chapter of AlA to look into the proposed fees, said the AlA position was that there was a need for increased planning department fees, but they were concerned that in some in- stances the fees proposed were excessive. They supported the AGC request for creation of a subcommittee to review the proposal. Frank Bonson, 1677 Country Club Road, planner and designer, agreed that a study committee review could benefit all - planning staff, taxpayers, and developers. He referred to peti- tion he previously presented asking for a review of planning expenditures. He also cited statistics indicating increase in planning staff and expenditures over the past nine years and said that the PUD procedure accounted for a good portion of it. He supported estab- ~ \~2 5/6/74 - 5 '