Loading...
02/23/1989 - Packet CITY CENTER PLAN TASK FORCE AGENDA THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 1989, 6:00 P.M. - 10:00 P.M.* TIGARD CIVIC CENTER - TOWN HALL CONFERENCE ROOM CALL TO ORDER: ROLL CALL: COHEN HENKLE JUAREZ MARR MORLEY 3. Approve Minutes 4. Report on Council Presentation and First Reading: Cohen 5. Report on Summerfield Presentation: Marr and Henkle 6. Report on Boards and Committees Presentation: Marr 7. Review Plan and Report: Moore 8. Review/Prepare Newsletters and Informational Literature: Group 9. Other Business 10. Adjournment * dinner provided CITY CENTER PLAN TASK FORCE Thursday, February 9, 1989 Town Hall Conference Room 7:00 p.m MINUTES Members Present: Stuart Cohen, Mike Marr, Pam Juarez, Richard Morley Consultants Present: Bob Moore Others Present: Ed Murphy, Liz Newton, Duane Roberts, Peggy Weston Byrd, Dan Dolan Called to order by Chairman Cohen at 7:06 p.m. Minutes of the previous two meetings were approved as written. 1. BREAKFAST MEETING FOLLOW-UP 2. REVIEW DRAFT OF DEVELOPMENT PLAN Bob indicated that the socio-economic and certain other sections were incomplete as yet. The numerical sections, as it were, are done. He stated that the report answers the question "is the plan financially feasible." The answer is yes if the assumptions make in the report are correct. The amount of tax increment funds available depends on the amount of private investment anticipated. In the report this was arrived at by way of the Hobson data. Other dollar amounts in the report are easier to estimate, because they are fixed. The capture rate of projected development within the market area, 345,000 square feet during the next 15 years, is somewhat above the Hobson median trend line. The rate is consistent with the numbers Bart and Wayne used throughout their respective studies. The residential growth rate assumed is based on Hobson's estimate of 40 units per year from the second year of the plan. A uniform rate of development is assumed for the purposes of the plan. Part of the private development depends on the installation of public facilities. Hard data from various sources on the cost of street, park, and other development were available. A 4% per year inflation rate also was included. Over the last seven years property values in the development area have been flat. Residential values have decreased. The estimates of property values show a 2% annual inflation plus new investment in the area. Mike asked if it were possible to add a column to Bob's to table 1 showing what the estimated rate would be without tax increment financing. Bob's answer was that this a requirement of the law and will be included. The final report will include specific data on the impact of tax increment financing on individual tax payers. In response to another question, he added that it is not possible to estimate what the growth rate in the development area would have been without tax increment financing, saying "it is too much of a guess." fir++ *40101 Bob indicated that small business and upscale apartment construction costs were used to derive the values shown in table 2. Peggy stated that the report needs to define the meaning of class "B" office space. In response to Richard's question, Bob said that the estimate of tax rates going up to $35 over a seven year period and remaining flat thereafter is based on the history of what has happened with tax rates in other cities. Many Oregon cities are already above $30 now. Dan Dolan asked the basis for assigning a value of one million dollars to the public square. Bob explained that we don't know the exact location, size, or value of the square. Because it will be created on private property, it will have a negative impact on valuation. The one million is a best guess. Mike asked if Tri-Met or the state would provide any money for light rail right-of-way acquisition. Bob stated that no compensation is available for publicly owned land. Table 3: $18,843,000 is the total sum left over for projects and administration. Money is needed as soon as possible in order to apply to projects and thereby generate private development. Not pay as you go. Rey number is total project expense. In response to a question by Mike, Bob noted that the program administrator title can be either a public or private position. Mike mentioned that the figure looked low for a professional administrator. By 2005 the debt service will be closed out. Any residual goes to the country. The program can't legally go into the red at close out. The plan shows what projects can be accomplished given the projected revenue stream. The breakout is in 3-5 year phases. Costs are current costs plus inflation. Bob tried to match projects to revenue. The numbers balance by 5-year periods. Stuart commented that the framework is flexible and the next successor committee can reshuffle projects if it desires. Bob noted that changes each and every year may be assumed in response to the need to match projects to what is needed to support specific private development. Peggy mentioned that she would like to see the Main St. bridge project moved to an earlier year. Ed wanted the plan to make clear that transportation bond money is not part of this package. It could be listed as a separate item or left in and identified as such. He said it was placed in the third year only because there is no agreement as yet on how the money will be spent. The project could move up once agreement is reached. Liz suggested that the table be organized in a matrix fashion to show how funds and projects match-up. Richard asked how the percentage formula for LIDs was determined. Bob stated that the 50% figure is based on current city policy. The streets would be improved to a standard above that needed to serve adjacent property. People also are less likely to object to the formation of the LID. Another consideration is that the Ash improvement goes through property that cannot be assessed: Fanno Park. Richard suggested that the "s" be deleted from the "towers" project. Bob noted that $2-3,000 per space is included for parking. Public parking is `+WAW `4r needed to support private investment. The revenue stream can't support the construction of a parking structure. Total assessed value figures include real property, railroad trackage, public utility lines, pipes, business equipment and other similar items. Mike asked if a different location for the off-ramp would be precluded by the adoption of the plan as written. The present configuration of the ramp may be logical in terms of traffic engineering, but the public has not had a full opportunity to comment and suggest alternative designs. Pam agreed that more time for public review of the plan in general was needed. Bob indicated that the plan can be changed before Council adoption. It can be changed only by the plan amendment process thereafter. Dan expressed that there had not been enough public input and that the Task Force had withheld information from the public. Stuart stated that ample opportunity for input had been provided. The workshop and breakfast meeting were cited. Peggy stated that there had been no conscious effort to hold anything back. Richard also objected to the implication that the Task Force had withheld information. Bob reiterated that the project list will change each and every year. A-BOY DEVELOPMENT PLAN Dan noted that the new store will front on Main St. The old store will be demolished. In a second phase, another building may be built on the site of the existing store. All storage will be indoors. The use will be the same as now: 80% retail and 20% warehouse. More hardware-type items will be sold. A one-story, cinder block structure is planned. Plans for the project will be submitted for city approval sometime this month. Pam noted that the design plan calls for a multi-story office buildings on the A-boy site and that the new store is adjacent to the proposed park. She asked if these departures from the design plan create a problem or conflict. Mike pointed out that the parking lot shown in Dan's plan is where the public square is designed to be located. Pam indicated that she is glad to see development, but is not sure how the A- Boy project meshes with the plan. Richard expressed a similar reservation. Mike noted a concern that the public might look with skepticism at the investment of more than one million dollars in a park that abuts a vehicle- oriented development that caters primarily to the construction trade. Given the new circumstances, the development agency may wish to look at changing the landscaping as shown in the park master plan and/or at relocating the amphitheater. Bob noted that if the City is concerned about the new A-Boy building being placed too close to the park, it should purchase a strip of property for a bike path or access to the park. Either the City should act or adjust the park plan. Mike indicated that if the City is initiating a plan that is to be followed throughout its time horizon, there needs to be some control of development consistent with the plan. If the plan is too flexible, there is essentially no control. If it is too wide open, major changes and amendments will be required each year. Pam asked how restrictive the plan should be. Mike answered that depended on how closely we want to follow the Vision. We will have no plan at all if we are too flexible. Stuart commented that long-term economic forces could change specific land uses in ways that may be more compatible with the Vision. Pan expressed the opinion that the plan should be "market driven." Richard expressed that the choice was to be very flexible or to pursue the plan as adopted. To assure that the plan is followed, it will be necessary to bit the bullet and make hard choices. PLAN ADOPTION SCHEDULE Ed outlined the steps leading to the adoption of the plan and ballot measure. These are shown below. The next Task Force meeting is set for Thursday 2/23 from 6:00-10:00 PM. Chairman Cohen adjourned the meeting at 10:10 PM. Respectfully submitted by Duane Roberts CITY OF TIVA RD February 23, 1989 OREGON Dear Business or Property Owner: The City Center Plan Task Force cordially invites you to a breakfast meeting for downtown business and property owners at Tigard City Hall on Friday, February 3rd from 7:00 to 8:30 A.M. After a major year-and-a-half effort, the committee has developed a long-range plan for improving Tigard's City Center area. The meeting will feature a presentation on the plan by architect Bart Guthrie of Guthrie/Slusarenko/Associates. Concept drawing, other graphic displays, and informational literature will be available. The main goal of the meeting is to solicit your comments and suggestions regarding the concepts developed by the committee. Please plan to attend. The committee feels strongly that your participation and review will lead to better City Center programs and projects. Sincerely, Stuart Cohen, Chairman V&L City Center Plan Task Force 13125 SW Hall Blvd.,P.O.Box 23397,Tigard,Oregon 97223 (503)639-4171 KBKO 2/24/89 TO: City Center Plan Task Force FK: Staff SUBJECT: Transportation improvement cost information According to Randy Wooley, the amount of Transportation Bond money available for Main St. improvements is $700,000. The estimate for the westerly extension of Ash contained in Bob's report includes the cost of the Hill St. connection. The cost figure for realligning the Scoffins/Hunziker intersection will be available on Monday. Please call Liz, 639-4171, if you would like to have this figure before Tuesday's meeting. LIST OF PROPERTY AND BUSINESS OWNER QUESTIONS BY CATEGORY General/Market 1 Why is downtown Tigard important? 2 What is the economic potential of downtown? 3 What are the City Center's main assets? 4 What are the City Center's main limitations? 5 What improvement opportunities are present in downtown? 6 What kind of business might go into the Albertson building? 7 How many acres of developable land are available in the downtown? General/Design 1 What are the goals of the development plan? 2 What are the specific improvement projects planned for downtown? 3 What are the projects envisioned in the City Center plan? Impact on Existing Businesses 1 How will the proposed plan affect existing uses in downtown? 2 Will existing businesses be allowed to expand under the Development Plan? 3 Does the plan include a moratorium on growth in the downtown? 4 Why do you want to make changes in the current zoning of downtown? 5 The mixed use concept seems to "work" in downtown. Why change it? 6 What sort of guarantees, if any, can we give to existing conforming and nonconforming uses? (What are the rules now in effect governing nonconforming uses? Which uses are nonconforming under current zoning regulations?) 7 Does the plan give any consideration to attracting new businesses and to encouraging existing businesses to stay and expand? Land Assembly 1 Why is condemnation authority a feature of the plan? 2 Which buildings are candidates for the bulldozer? 3 How many businesses will be relocated under the development plan? 4 Will "vital" businesses be displaced? 5 Is the acquisition of the A-Boy property part of the development plan? Does the proposed Parks Bond include funds for this purpose? 6 What assistance will be available to businesses that are "wiped out" by redevelopment projects? 7 What relocation assistance will be available? 8 What are the buildings that the plan identifies as landmarks to be saved? Design Guidelines 1 Has the committee developed any design criteria? 2 Why are downtown design guidelines necessary? Traffic 1 What can be done about the downtown traffic nightmare? 2 Why was Tigard St. rather than Commercial selected as the main northerly portal into downtown? 3 Why is Burnham receiving more emphasis than Commercial? 4 Why is Burnham reconfigured to connect to Main opposite Tigard St.? Did you consider realigning Tigard St. to connect with Main opposite the existing Burnham/Main intersection? 5 What is the reason for the proposed Burnham dogleg connection to Tigard St? In light of the problems with the Greenburg/Tiedeman intersection, why isn't Tigard St. connected to Commercial instead? 6 Why couldn't the ramp connecting Pacific Highway to Tigard (or Commercial) St. be placed behind the car wash? 7 What are the changes planned to Main St.? What is the ultimate width planned? 8 Is Main St. proposed to be one- or two-way? 9 Why hasn't the City ever widened the bridge on Main? This was promised by City officials as long as twenty-five years ago? 10 How is the money for Main St. included in the Transportation Bond going to be spent? 11 Will the connection of Ash to Hunziker run through the apartment building that is located on the south side of the existing segment of Ash between Commercial and Scoffins? 12 What are the cost figures for the road improvements envisioned in the plan? 13 What parking improvements, if any, are proposed? Financing 1 Is the plan as a whole realistically financable? 2 What is tax increment financing? 3 How do urban renewal and tax increment financing work? 4 What are the benefits of using tax increment financing? 5 Why is the City considering tax increment financing for the City Center? 6 What would the adoption of tax increment financing do for the downtown? 7 What would be the effect of a property tax freeze on downtown development? 8 How would tax increments financing affect my personal property taxes? 9 Would Tigard taxpayers be required to pay additional taxes if the tax increment is not adequate to pay back money borrowed to make improvements? 10 Do Tigard voters get an opportunity to vote on the use of tax increment financing in the City Center? 11 How long does the tax increment district run? 12 When will increased assessed values be put back on the tax rolls? 13 What is the assessed value of property in the proposed district? 14 What are blighted conditions? 15 What other options are available and capable of funding the projects dicussed besides tax increment financing? 16 What will be the cost of the plan to downtown property owners? 17 What is the level of support for a property owner LID to cover the total expense of improvements to downtown? 18 Where are the City taxes downtown property owner's currently are paying being spent? 19 What would be the effect of a sales tax on downtown development? 20 Wouldn't it have been more efficacious to spend money on improvements rather than on consultants? Process 1 Why didn't the Committee work to get more people involved? 2 Why wasn't more of an effort made to involve downtown owners? 3 Why is the City moving so fast toward the adoption of a plan? Why isn't more time allowed before the plan goes to the Council in mid-February for property owner participation and review? Can the process be slowed down? 4 What are the main objections from the business community to the proposed plan? How are we addressing their concerns? 5 How can I get involved? Implementation 1 How soon will all this begin? What are the next steps? 2 What is the scenario or timeframe for implementing the plan? What will happen when? Are the start of any improvements four or five years away? 3 Will the plan be implemented in a gradual, piecemeal, phased manner? 4 Who makes the decision about which projects or plans are submitted to the voters? 5 Can the plan be changed after it is adopted by the voters? 6 Can the plan be changed if people have different ideas about the downtown ten years from now? 7 Why will this plan for improving downtown succeed when other, previous plans have failed? Adoption 1 Will existing zoning regulations be changed by Council adoption of the development plan on February 13th? 2 What will the May ballot deal with? 3 What exactly will the May vote decide? E Sources: NPO meeting Breakfast meeting Pam's interviews with downtown owners Valerie and Jerry's meeting with owners Newsletters of other cities [ ] deletion addition [CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN NEWSLETTER] [ No. 2] WHAT IS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING? Simply put, tax increment financing is a method that gives the City a way of funding redevelopment from taxes collected in the development district itself. It provides Tigard with the opportunity to encourage economic growth and strengthen our community. And, it allows all our taxing districts to benefit from [the] increased valuation associated with development or redevelopment of specific properties. This is graphically shown in the illustration below. [The basic steps in the use of tax increment financing by a jurisdiction are as follows. (see diagram) ] The existing assessed value in the [district] area designated for development becomes the base year assessed value. The tax rates for all involved taxing districts, such as the Tigard School District and the Tualatin Fire District, are applied to this base year assessed value. [And, ] Property tax revenues generated continue to go to these districts. As property values increase, additional property tax revenue is generated. This additional revenue goes to pay for the public improvements that have been provided. Once expenses of the public improvements have been paid, the [total] increased valuation of the properties [can be returned] is released to the tax rolls for all taxing districts [once again]. This [can] results in an increase in the [total] districts assessed value, broadening the [tax base] valuation age, and reducing tax rate pressure for all taxpayers. WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF USING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING? Tax increment finacing is a method for paying for necessary public improvements so that private development can take place. The cost of these improvements is repaid through taxes collected on increased valuation of the property in the development district where the improvements are made. The dollars from tax increment financing provide the public infrastructure and public commitment to new development so that private investment may occur. WHY IS THE CITY CONSIDERING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING FOR THE CITY CENTER? [The] Revitalization of the City Center area is, in part, dependent upon the City's ability to finance public services and facilities. With [the] curtailment of many federal assistance programs, Oregon cities have lost [their primary] a major source of funds for downtown development. Incentives for private investment are now a common tool for attracting new [industrial] and commercial developemnt. These incentives include public improvements to areas where the cost of [services] necessary public facilities might otherwise be prohibitive to private invesment. As [the] general revenues of local governments are increasingly limited, new economic tools, such as tax increment financing, are being used successfully by numerous cities throughout Oregon. Redevlopment projects in Albany, [Beaverton, ] Clackamas County, Newport, Portland, Salem, and Seaside were done using tax increment financing. DO TIGARD VOTERS GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO VOTE ON [THE USE OF] REDEVELOPING A DOWNTOWN CENTER FOR TIGARD USING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING IN THE CITY CENTER? Yes, assumming Council approval in February 1989 of the Tigard City Center Development Plan [and the tax increment mechanism], Tigard voters would vote in May on the [use of tax increment financing for implementing the plan. ] plan and and the financial assistance that tax increment financing provides. HOW WOULD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING AFFECT MY PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX? In a typical tax increment district, there would be no discernable effect on [personal] property taxes during the life of the financing plan. However, at some point depending on the increase in [value of the tax increment] values in the city center relative to the total value of all other taxing districts, there may [be up to a] 1%-3% [increase in personal property taxes] higher. After the [debts] projects of the [district] development area are repaid and the [district] development area is dissolved, property taxes drop [substantially.] as increased valuation is released for use by all overlapping taxing districts. HOW LONG DOES THE [TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT] CITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN RUN? [The tax increment district] runs until the debts of the district are paid. The typical districts last from 15-20 years, depending on the specific kinds of development, the financing plan, and the rate at which development occurs. The City Center Development plan is proposed at 15 years. This period represents the maximum life of the district. Some districts have been able to shutdown and put enhanced values back on the tax rolls earlier than the timelimit on the district.