Item 3 - PH on Downtown UR Plan - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

cities throughout the United States. In fact, it has been reported that Eugene was the very last jurisdiction to receive a federal Title 1 Urban Renewal Grant. For every dollar of local match, there were two federal dollars granted. It was these federal urban renewal funds that paid for acquisitions and the rehabilitation or demolition of many substandard structures. The City match came from tax increment financing, road funds, and other local sources. A special district created to construct the Overpark Garage at 10th and Oak provided a significant portion of the federal match. Renewal district activities included substantial upgrades to the downtown infrastructure. Up until that time, the storm sewer and sanitary sewer systems were combined. They were separated with UR funding and the sanitary sewer lines, many in deteriorated condition, were all relined. EWEB upgraded the electrical grid and improved the downtown steam system to heat buildings. These infrastructure improvements made greater density downtown possible. All downtown buildings were evaluated for safety. Inspectors considered issues such as earthquake standards, fire danger, and the safety of exits and entrances. Many of the existing buildings were constructed prior to 1910. They were constructed of brick using a lime mortar that deteriorated over time and caused the buildings to crumble. Foundations sometimes barely existed. One example was a drug store at Broadway and Willamette where the plaza is now. The foundation was stacked stone with no mortar or cement. Frequently buildings had very steep wooden stairways to the second floor. These were a severe danger in case of fire. As a result, some buildings were rehabilitated (including Smeede Hotel, Penney' s, Broadway Department Store, Montgomery Wards, Axbilly Department Store, Shafer Building, McDonald Theater Building), some were demolished, and others were newly constructed. Staff has located some large maps that show the inventory of the downtown buildings and their condition. These will be placed in the City Council office prior to the public hearing. Councilor Meisner and others raised questions concerning the length of the term of the proposed Downtown district extension. Specifically, a question was asked about what could be accomplished if the council chose shorter term extensions of various lengths. Urban renewal works best as a tool to assist communities to take advantage of redevelopment opportunities as they arise. It is very difficult to project when urban renewal funds will be needed for particular improvements or expenditures that would leverage certain private investments. The district is currently set to expire in 2009. The revenue projections indicate that a maximum of about $1.2 million (revenue after library debt service) could be available in any single year to fund downtown projects. With a limited term extension, the district would be very constricted in its ability to use bonds to fund larger expenditures like significant public works projects or property acquisitions. It is important to recognize that these larger urban renewal projects are realized over longer periods of time. For example, the new downtown library project is a 16-year urban renewal project which began with the 1993 property acquisition and ends with the 2009 payoff of urban renewal bonds. Longer term extensions of 10, 15 or 20 years would provide the flexibility necessary to use a combination of current year revenues and debt to achieve redevelopment. Councilor Taylor and Councilor Kelly requested information about how tax increment financing works. Attachment F provides basic answers to some complicated questions. Extensive detailed information can be found at the website for the Association of Oregon Redevelopment Agencies (AORA). The specific URL is: http://www.orurbanrenewal.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabindex=4&tabid=302 Timing Action is scheduled on September 13, 2004. L:\CMO\2004 Council Agendas\M040809\S0408093.doc