06/02/1987 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e authority for redevelopment project loan programs. She said the renewal agency approved only the offering of sites for development, adding that staff would make recommendations for that area. Ms. Stewart said the Downtown Commission had a strong recommending role, with recommendations often made to the City Council rather than to the renewal agency. She also said the Downtown Commission commented on the Capital Improvements Program, on which the Planning Commission made recommendations, and the Downtown Commission had no recommending or approval authority for redevelopment of existing bUilding which was part of the budget process. The Planning Commission made recommendations on all development plans, she added, and staff' s role was in drafting and forwarding recommendations and in negotiating and implementing projects according to given policy direction. She said the private-sector contributed comments and "approved" development and redevelopment projects by providing support for them. Ms. Stewart said some problematic areas that might be addressed concerned the lack of renewal agency approval for the Tax Increment Capital Improvements Program. She said a recommendation was sent to the Planning Commission and then to the City Council. Mr. Gl eason added that the Capi ta 1 Improvements Program was revi ewed by the Budget Subcommittee before bei ng sent to the council. Ms. Stewart said other areas that might be addressed included the renewal agency's role in the Tax Increment budget and in public improvements within the district. She said the Planning Com~ission would be involved only in plans, land-use issues, public improvements related to transportation, and historic preservation issues. Mr. Holmer asked about the need to define renewal agency functions, adding that because the renewal agency was the council, hi s only concern was legality. Ms. Stewart said oversights might have occurred specifically in the Tax Increment portion of the Capital Improvements Program, the Tax Increment budget, and the public improvements made with Tax Increment funds within renewal agency boundaries. Mr. Farkas said the functions of the council and the renewal agency di ffered, wi th the counci 1 generally representing the entire community and with the renewal agency acting as the development company for the downtown area. Ms. Schue said she thought difficulties might arise because the discussions as Urban Renewal Agency tended to be briefer than discussions as City Council. Mr. Gleason said he thought some active approval was needed prior to review by the Budget Subcommittee. Ms. Stewart added that substantive debate on the Capital Improvements Program now was occurring on the Downtown Commission. Mayor Obie noted that when the Downtown Commission had been established, the council had tried to develop a role with a high level of creative energy and commitment, with a strong recommending role similar to that of the Planning Commission. He said the council had agreed to appoint the commission and to approve plans. Mayor Obie said some councilors may have been uncomfortable with Downtown Commission projects that seemed to be proceeding without sufficient council knowledge, but he added that he was not uncomfortable and thought a certain amount of conflict could be healthy. MINUTES--Eugene City Council Dinner/Work Session June 2, 1987 Page 10