CC Minutes - 11/22/99 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

development so that a single-family unit would pay less than an apartment house and only new development paid an SDC. Mr. Meisner said he understood the complexity of the primary access debate and that he had no interest in a general obligation bond or in spreading the cost to all of the tax payers. He said that it was very clear in the Growth Management Policies that development was expected to pay its way. He added that at the same time he wished that there could be a way for internal streets relying upon arterials/collectors to contribute to the cost of those arterials/collectors. Mr. Kelly explained that there had been different proposals to address Mr. Meisner's concerns, and that none of them were accepted as workable. He pointed out that property owners adjacent to arterials/collectors were not assessed the full cost of that street, but were assessed the cost of 10 or 14 feet of street width as if it were a local street, with SDCs picking up the balance. Mr. Lyle noted that the internal lots paid an SDC whereas the existing dwellings on an arterial/collector did not. He said that he did not know if that all balanced out. Mr. Meisner said that was part of the fiscal analysis that he would like to have. Mayor Torrey asked Mr. Lyle if he could provide a comparison of a SDC for an apartment complex with an assessment for a house on the street. Mr. Lyle said that he would provide that information. In response to a question from Ms. Taylor, Mr. Lyle said that whenever a development proposal came to the City, the developer would pay an equivalent assessment for his/her share of the adjoining arterial/collector as well participate in the cost of any other internal street or local street adjacent to the development. He added that the developer would also pay the SDCs commensurate with the type of development. Developers would pay for both the internal network and their share of the adjoining streets as well as SDCs. Mayor Torrey noted that there was a public hearing on the committee's recommendations scheduled for December 6, 1999. Mr. Kelly pointed out that there would be a need for a start-up fund of about $600,000 to front the delayed assessments. Eventually, the fund would become a revolving fund. Mayor Torrey expressed some concern about whether or not the County would approve these policy changes. Mr. Kelly reported that Commissioner Bill Dwyer had said that the committee was heading in the right direction, and that Commissioner Bobby Green had agreed that the policies were ready to be taken to work sessions. He said that the Board of County Commissioners had not scheduled a formal work session yet. Mr. Lyle summarized that the council was supportive of the proposal as presented. He said that staff would address as many of the questions raised during the work session as possible in the briefing paper, but that time was limited before the public hearing. He said that the committee would continue to refine the proposal before coming back to council on January 24, 2000. C. Work Session: Downtown and Franklin Boulevard-Willamette River Planning Mr. Johnson noted that this was a continued discussion on visioning for downtown and the Franklin Boulevard-Willamette River corridor area. Paul Farmer, Planning and Development Department Director, led the discussion. MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 22, 1999 Page 9 5:30 p.m.