CCDA Minutes - 10/18/2005 Agenda Item No. -3,;),
For Agenda of )a, 13, OS
CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
- AN URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY-
AND TIGARD PLANNING COMMISSION
MEETING MINUTES
OCTOBER 18, 2005
1. CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CCDA) MEETING
1.1 Chair Dirksen called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
1.2 CCDA Members present: Chair Dirksen, Directors Harding, Sherwood,
Wilson (arrived at 7:14 p.m.), and Woodruff.
1.3 Planning Commission Members present: President Padgett;
Commissioners Buehner, Caffall, Haack, Inman. Also present: Planning
Commissioner Alternate Walsh.
2. CONSIDER AN URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AND REFER THE PLAN AND
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Consultant Jeff Tashman reviewed the key aspects of the Plan and Report:
o Represents years of planning.
o Extensive outreach was conducted.
o The Urban Renewal Plan is a way to implement the Downtown Improvement
Plan.
o Tax increment financing is a tool contained in the Urban Renewal Plan.
o The City Center Advisory Commission (CCAC) held a series of meeting. The
CCAC proposed including more area in the urban renewal district than what
was proposed in the Downtown Improvement Plan.
o Functions of the Plan and Report were reviewed:
• Budget process is same process as required for a City.
• Funds to be borrowed; decisions on expenditures need to be made.
• Goals and objectives are outlined.
• The County Assessor will measure the value of the property within
the urban renewal boundary. This initial valuation will be used to
determine the growth in value of the district over time.
• Projects are defined in a general way; details will change.
CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY—OCTOBER 18, 2005 page 1
• Moans and grants will be available to property and business owners,
which is a key component of urban renewal.
• The Plan contains policy analyses required by state law.
Director Wilson arrived at 7:14 p.m.
• The Urban Renewal Plan allows limited authority for acquiring
property. It is anticipated that some initiative measures will be
before Oregon voters in the 2006 General Election to change the
State Constitution regarding condemnation when a private
developer is involved.
• The maximum indebtedness over the life of the Plan is $22 million.
• Impacts of tax increment financing were mentioned including the
indirect impacts on K-12 schools.
• Urban Renewal Plan has a 20-year life, expiring in 2027. Cost
recovery is estimated to occur within ten years; debts would be paid
off within two years; tax increment financing would continue until
financing is paid off.
• City Charter and State Law govern the Urban Renewal District.
Substantial changes must be submitted to the Tigard voters. Area
changes greater than one percent would be considered
"substantial."
• Reviewed structure and authority of the CCDA for considering
amendments.
• Reviewed how the $22 million amount was determined. This
amount was derived by looking at the proposed urban renewal plan
area and evaluating which parcels are vacant or likely to be
redeveloped. The CCAC wanted to make sure the debt cap is high
enough to get the job done, yet not so high that the impact is over-
estimated.
• Financing sources outside of tax increment financing include state
and foundation grants.
• Funding allocations among projects are flexible under the $22
million cap.
• The City's Finance Department staff would assist with the
development of the first year's budget for the CCDA.
• Comments were made by CCDA members and Planning
Commissioners about initial projects. Initial projects will be
conservative and selected to stimulate growth in the urban renewal
area.
City Attorney Ramis presented information on the urban renewal approval
process and standards. A copy of the presentation viewed by the CCDA and
Planning Commission members is on file in the Agency Recorder's office.
CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY—OCTOBER 18, 2005 page 2
It was determined that Legal Counsel will be present at the Planning
Commission's hearing on the Urban Renewal Plan.
CCDA members then commented on the proposed Urban Renewal Plan and
Report:
Chair Dirksen noted on Page 14 of the Report, Section E. — Municipal Services —
(third line down) the words "...is described in section IX of this Report" should be
changed to "..Js described in section X of this Report."
Chair Dirksen referred to Page 7 of the Report. The first two paragraphs refer to
existing uses of the downtown that do not conform to the goals and objectives.
Those two paragraphs make reference to specific businesses and since the
CCDA does not intend to target any particular businesses, Chair Dirksen
suggested that this is not appropriate. He said the two paragraphs should be
rewritten as follows:
in particular, automobile-oriented uses and manufacturing and industrial
facilities do not support the City's goal to create a vibrant, pedestrian
friendly atmosphere downtown. These are examples of area businesses
that play a valuable role in the local economy but are not appropriate uses
of the CBD. (then continue with the rest of the paragraph).
Director Sherwood said on Page 26 of the Report there is no budget item
identified for property acquisition for willing sellers. After discussion, Consultant
Tashman indicated an estimate could be made for property acquisition for willing
sellers as well as another budget item for public facilities.
Interim Community Development Director Coffee noted typographical corrections
will be made. For example, the page breaks in the tables of the Report need to
be adjusted.
Director Wilson referred to a comment he made before about the fact that some
of the auto-oriented uses in the urban renewal area are government uses. He
suggested that the zoning code review consider whether fleet storage is
appropriate. He also commented that he hoped the federal government would
consider a retail postal outlet in the downtown area rather than a distribution
center.
Director Woodruff said he was comfortable with adopting the resolution. He said
he thinks "we are really just moving it along in the process..." He added that he
was anxious to get more official public input from the upcoming Planning
Commission and City Council hearings.
CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY—OCTOBER 18, 2005 page 3
In response to a question from Chair Dirksen, City Attorney Ramis advised he
would give a qualified "yes" answer that the Urban Renewal Plan document
addresses all legal requirements. City Attorney Ramis advised that his office has
reviewed the documents against the requirements of the statute and has had
conversations with staff and the consultant about some things that should be
clarified. He said that he would expect that by the time the City Center
Development Agency/City Council sees this document again, there will be some
evolution of it. City Attorney Ramis said he thought "we are 95 percent there."
Chair Dirksen noted the Plan refers to the area as "blighted." He noted the term
"blight" might cause some concern among some members of the community.
Chair Dirksen said, in his opinion, the term "blight" applied to this area only
because it has not achieved its highest and best use and it needs some help in
order to do so. Because this area has not lived up to its development potential,
it has caused an extra burden on other areas of the City. He gave housing as an
example -- since there is very little housing downtown and there is no
opportunity for housing development in the area, greater demands are being
placed on Tigard's traditional neighborhoods to take on capacity required in the
Urban Growth Boundary. Including a high density residential component to the
Downtown Plan, helps alleviate some of that pressure on existing
neighborhoods.
Consideration of CCDA Resolution No. 05-01:
Director Sherwood moved for adoption of the proposed Resolution No. 05-01.
Director Woodruff seconded the motion.
CCDA RESOLUTION 05-01 —A RESOLUTION PROPOSING AN URBAN
RENEWAL PLAN AND REFERRING THE PROPOSED URBAN RENEWAL
PLAN AND REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, DIRECTING
DISTRIBUTION OF THE URBAN RENEWAL PLAN AND REPORT TO TAXING
DISTRICTS AND DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE AGENCY MANAGER
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of City Center Development
Agency members present:
Chair Dirksen: Yes
Director Harding: Yes
Director Sherwood: Yes
Director Wilson: Yes
Director Woodruff: Yes
CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY—OCTOBER 18, 2005 page 4
3. Motion by Director Wilson, seconded by Director Sherwood, to adjourn the
meeting at 8:13 p.m.
The motion was approved by a unanimous vote of City Center Development
Agency members present:
Chair Dirksen: Yes
Director Harding: Yes
Director Sherwood: Yes
Director Wilson: Yes
Director Woodruff: Yes
Catherine Wheatley, Recorder
Attest: City Center Development Agency
14F "e'�2f
Craig irk en, Chairperson
City Center Development Agency
Date: /�'/3 4�S-
hadm1calhylc=200%051011 ccda.dac
CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGENCY—OCTOBER 18, 2005 page 5