05/24/1989 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e block, and the existing urban renewal area plus a full 20 percent expansion. He said a summary of this information would be sent to each councilor following the meeting. Mr. Hibschman explained that staff has not prepared a pro forma for the creation of a new district because of the problem of seed money. Mr. Hibschman reviewed the assumptions that staff used in determining the financial impact of a parking assessment district. Staff anticipates that the financial impact on property owners would be approximately $20 per $1,000 per year of assessed valuation. Mr. Holmer said he is bothered that the council is accepting the 20 percent expansion option based on very specific assumptions about when certain projects will occur. He felt that if development does not occur in the manner predicted by staff, the City will look foolish. Ms. Ehrman disagreed. She said that funds will not be lost in expansion of the district because they will not be expended until there is developement. Ms. Bascom moved, seconded by Mr. Rutan, that the City Council direct staff to prepare a modified renewal plan and report on the plan along the lines of Option 8, with a possible modification to take advantage of opportunities in the parking area beside the Oregon Electric Station. e Mr. Boles reiterated his position that while it is important to support the development activity currently occurring in the area of proposed expansion, the council should explore methods other than urban renewal to do this. He added that the area of proposed expansion does not meet the conditions of blight, and felt that if anything, the expansion would suck resources out of the downtown area and exacerbate the existing problems in that area. Mr. Bennett stated that the definition of blight is very broad. He said that on the basis of improvement-to-land ratios, the area of proposed expansion meets the test of blight. Mr. Bennett emphasized that the expansion would be revenue-neutral at the very least. He added that expansion is in the best interests of the community because it will promote compact urban growth. Mr. Bennett said he is sorry that this growth is not occurring in the existing urban renewal area. Ms. Schue agreed with Mr. Bennett. The motion carried 5:3, with Ms. Bascom, Mr. Rutan, Mr. Bennett, Ms. Schue, and Ms. Ehrman voting in favor, and Mr. Holmer, Mr. Boles, and Mr. Green voting against the motion. Mr. Rutan noted that councilors had received correspondence from Centennial Bank which wants to develop on a short time frame. He asked the council to respond positively to this request. Mr. Rutan said one avenue for helping this business is to expand the parking-exempt district. Ms. Ehrman said she does not favor expanding the parking-exempt district. e MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 24, 1989 Page 5