Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDCAP102314CENTRAL POINT Members: Hank Williams Allen Broderick Bruce Dingler David Douglas Ellie George Kelly Geiger Rick Samuelson Staff Liaison: Chris Clayton Don Burt City of Central Point Development Commission Agenda October 23, 2014 6:00 P.M. Central Point Council Chambers 140 S. 3rtl Street Central Point, Oregon Meeting time, date, or location may be subject to change. Please contact the City Recorder at 541-423-1026 for additional information. I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER -6:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Development Commission Minutes for June 12, 2014. III. DISCUSSIONITEMS A. Review of 2014Tax Increment Revenue Estimate (Burt) B. Review of 2013/2014 Development Commission Project Guide & Priorities (Burt) C. Possible Amendments to 2014/2015 Development Commission Budget(Burt) VI. ADJOURNEMENT CITY OF CENTRAL POINT Development Commission Minutes June 12, 2014 I. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Chair, Mayor Hank Williams called the meeting to order at 6:45 p.m. II. ROLL CALL: Chair: Mayor Hank Williams Commission Members: Allen Broderick, Bruce Dingier, Rick Samuelson, Ellie George and Kelly Geiger. David Douglas was absent. City Manager Chris Clayton; Finance Director Bev Adams; Community Development Director Tom Humphrey; Planning Manager Don Burt; Parks and Public Works Director Matt Samitore; and City Recorder Deanna Casey were also present. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. Approval of December 12, 2013 Development Commission Minutes Kelly Geiger moved to approve the Development Commission Minutes as presented. Allen Broderick seconded. Roll Call: Allen Broderick, yes; Bruce Dingier, yes; Rick Samuelson, yes; Ellie George; and Kelly Geiger, yes. Motion approved. IV. PUBLIC HEARING Public Hearing - Resolution No. 2014.01, Adopting the Budget, Making Appropriations, and Declaring Tax Increment. Planning Manager Don Burt explained the highlights from last year and stated that the Central Point Budget Commission met to review the proposed budget on April 28, 2014. After the discussion they voted to approve the budget for $144,300. This is the third year for the Development Commission. The proposed budget is a conservative budget because we are waiting to see how the money will grow with the few projects that have come in over this year. The projects are administrative functions, and design concepts. Mayor Williams opened the Public Hearing, no one came forward and the public hearing was closed. Bruce Dingier moved to approve Resolution No. 2014.01, Adopting the Budget, Making Appropriations and Declaring Tax Increment. Kelly Geiger seconded. Roll Call: Allen Broderick, yes; Bruce Dingier, yes; Rick Samuelson, yes; Ellie George; and Kelly Geiger, yes. Motion approved. City ,fCcnt, d Point City Cmmci!Min Oc, jumc 12, 20114 Pagc Z ADJOURNMENT Allen Broderick moved to adjourn, Kelly Geiger seconded, all said "aye" and the meeting was adjourned at 6:54 p.m. Dated: Chair Mayor Hank Williams ATTEST: City Recorder ml City of Central Point, Oregon A Planning Department 140 So. Third St., Central Point, Or 97502 CENTRAL Tom l lumphrey,NCP, 541564.3321 Fax541.664.6384 POINT Community Development Director m v,v.o.centrel-pol ncocus MEMORANDUM To: Chris Clayton, City Manager Central Point Development Commission From: Don Burt, AICP, Planning Manager Subject: FY 14/15 Budget Date: October 8, 2014 The primary purpose of this memo is to update the Commission on urban renewal's budget and capital expenses as we move into the second quarter of FY 14/15. It is about this time each year when our estimate of tax increment revenue (TIR) is validated, or not. Unlike last year the news this year appears to be more positive. At the end of the memo a brief discussion is provided outlining options for consideration of the increase in FIR. BUDGET UPDATE Total Expenditures: Total budgeted expenditures $144,300 (S120,000 capital projects and $24,300 administration, debt service and contingency). As of 9/30/2014 slightly over $101.33 has been spent. Capital Projects: The following is an update on the status of the funded capital projects: a. Oak Street Parking Lot ($25,000 budgeted). This project has been completed. Urban Renewal was budgeted to pay the cost of the lighting fixtures, which came in at $29,535. Prior to payment of the KM35 the Commission will be formally requested to authorize payment. Project Status: Committed Budgetlmpact: $29,535 expenditure 7s $4,535 (18% over budget). Capital Budget Balance: $90,465 b. South Front Street Pedestrian Lights S50,000 budgeted). Urban Renewal's commitment for this project was to pay the cost of the street lighting installation. The preliminary engineer's estimate for this project was completed October 6, 2014 and came in at S 124,462. Staff has requested that the engineers re-evaluate their estimates based on additional input from staff. It should also be noted that after the budget was adopted the scope of this project expanded to include the Dairy Queen frontage, which is part of the engineer's estimate. Page 1 of 3 Asa result of the cost of the Freeman Road Project the City does not have the funds to contribute to this project as initially intended. Considering the cost latest cost estimate for this project and the loss of City participation this project must be postponed to a date to be determined. Project Status: Not Coimnitted Budget Impact: No unpact untr1 project authorized by Commission. Current Capital Projects balance does not support this project. Schedule for, further consideration by the Commission. Capital Budget Balance: $90,465 c. Economic Incentive Program ($20,000 budgeted). Streetscape Improvement Program. Last fiscal year the Commission adopted a Streetscape Reimbursement Program and approved a Streetscape Reimbursement Agreement with Walgreens in an amount not to exceed 535,283 to be paid over a seven year period (55,318.33/yr.) at a rate of 1.36%. The Streetscape improvements have been completed and the developer has suburutted invoices for qualifying streetscape improvements. Staff has reviewed the submittals and asked for support documentation verifying expenses. Per the agreement Walgreens payments are not scheduled to begin until January 15, 2016. However; payment can be accelerated at the Commission's discretion. ii. Facade Improvement Program. Some discussion has been given to a Facade Improvement Program. Staff is preparing background information for the Commission's consideration in Febmary. Project Status: Not Committed Budget Impact: No impact until new programs authorized or Commission elects to accelerate the Walgreens Agreement. Capitol Budget Balance: $90,465 d. Design Services, Geld and Road Extension Concept Plan ($25,000). No activity at this time. Prior to proceeding on this project further discussion with the Commission is warranted. Project Status: Not Committed Budget Impact: No impact until new programs authorized or Commission elects to accelerate the Walgreens Agreement. Capitol Budget Balance: $90,465 Beginning Fund Balance: Budgeted at S 124,200 and the actual is 5126,000. Tax Increment Revenue: Budgeted at 519,400. This was a conservative estimate based on the prior year's TIR receipt of $6,500. Recently, we were advised by the Assessor's Office that the Commission's estimated FY 14/15 TIR will be approximately $125,000. It was emphasized that this was a preliminary number and that a final number will be available later in October. Based on a review of the assessor's records the cause for the increase was due to the periodic appraisal updates of residential neighborhoods within the urban renewal area. Page 2 of 3 Total Revenue: Based on the above the funds available to the Commission for FY 14/15 have increased from $144,300 to $245,000 (approx.). an increase in excess of $100,000. TAX INCREMENT REVENUE INCREASE CONSIDERATIONS When compared against last year this year's increase (assessor estimate) in TIR is significant (541%) and not likely repeatable in FYI 5/16. Based on a review of the Assessors records the cause for the increase was primarily due to the Assessors reappraisal schedule for the residential neighborhoods in the urban renewal district. What does the increase in tax increment revenue mean for the Commission? Relative to the FY 14/15 Budget the Commission has two basic options: 1. Do nothing, meaning leave the budget as originally approved. The difference in budgeted vs. received tax increment revenue will be carried over to the next fiscal year; or 2. Amend the budget to add projects allowing the Commission to partially, or completely, spend the increase in tax increment revenue. An amendment to the budget needs to consider the need/urgency in having to spend the additional funds. If there are unjustifiable needs/urgencies then it is preferable to carry the addition TIR to the following fiscal year. As an example, if the Commission decides to undertake the South Front Street Pedestrian Lights Project, bid documents and contract award for that project can be completed FY 14/15 with a contract Beginning of Construction date for FY 15/16. The project gets completed, but approximately four months later. BONDING AUTHORTY The Commission has the authority to sell urban renewal bonds. Urban renewal bonds are considered revenue bonds since the source of repayment is tax increment revenue. Because of the nature of tax increment revenue the banks consider urban renewal bonds to corny more risk than general obligation bonds. Consequently, the cost of urban renewal bonds, measured in interest paid, is higher. A review of recent urban renewal bond rates finds the range to be between 4.25% and 4.7% depending on the urban renewal districts bond rating. At S 125,000 in TIR the Commission has a bonding capacity of approximately S 1,250,000 Gross and S 1,125,000 Net. These two figures are based on a 20 year maturity and a rate of 5%. The 5% rate may appear high but has been upwardly adjusted to reflect bond costs. The difference between the Gross and Net proceeds is due to a mandatory 10% reserve set -a -side. The purpose of the reserve is to accommodate any shortfalls in debt seryice payments —should they occur. It should also be noted that the banks only considers 70% of total TIR as eligible for purposes of calculating the gross bond proceeds. 5 -YEAR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM As the TIR increases, and the associated bonding capacity, the importance of a 5 -Year Development Program takes on more importance. A 5 -Year Development Program is much like a capital improvement program, but includes soft projects, i.e. economic incentives. Like a capital improvement program it is a precursor to preparation of the budget. The Commission has discussed a 5 -Year Development Program, but no formal action has been taken. A number one priority for this fiscal year should be adoption of a 5 -Year Development Program. Page 3 of 3 CENTRAL POINT URBAN RENEWAL Project Survey Results Development Commission Meeting July 25, 2013 Overview Purpose: Support project priorities for the next five years. Methodology: Projects scored based on perceived Visual and Economic Impacts. Scores assigned based on the following level of impact: None = 0 Points Low = 1 Point Medium = 2 Points High = 3 Points Responses were collected, totaled and averaged. Results 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Urban Renewal Project Ranking Survey Results Project Name Visual Impact Score Economic Impact Score Total Score Downtown Core Area Streetscape Improvements 2.71 2.14 4.85 Highway 99 Corridor Improvements 2.14 1.86 4 Economic Development Incentives 1.71 2.14 3.85 East Pine Street Improvements 1.86 1.86 3.72 Neighborhood Sidewalks, Street Lighting & Alleys 1.86 1.43 3.29 Off Street Parking Facilities 1.57 1.57 3.14 City of Central Point Community Center 1.71 1.14 2.85 Pfaff Park Renovation 1.71 1.14 2.85 Fire Safety 1 1.14 2.14 Gephard Road Extension 0.67 1.14 1.81 South Peninger Road Extension 0.57 1 1.57 Totals 17.51 16.56 34.07 Central Point Urban Renewal Project Guide Introduction—The urban renewal projects (15) have been consolidated down to eleven (11) core projects. The table below is untended for use in understanding each project, its benefits, probable timilig, associated urban renewal projects, and their potential tax increment revenue generation. The information in this guide is open for discussion and is intended as an aide in determining which projects the Commission wants to advance over the course of the next five (5) years. Each project is described (column 4), it benefits identified (column 3), timing (column 5), associated projects (column 7), and prioritization (column 6). Strategy—The basic strategy on which the Project Prioritization Matrix is based is maximization of tax increment revenue in the early years of the urban renewal program, with the highest positive visual impact. This strategy allows the Commission the advantage of compounding early increases in assessed value, improving the probability that all urban renewal projects will be funded. Prioritization — The Prioritization column rates each project in accordance with its perceived probability of measurably addressing the objectives of the urban renewal plan within the next five years, with a heavy weighting given to the generation of tax increment revenue and image appearance. Each project has been evaluated based on the following criteria: Visual Impact — Measures the project's relative visual impact on the City's image within the next years. There are three levels of visual impact: None (0), Low (1), Medium (2), and High (3). Economic Impact —Measures the project's affect on tax increment collections within the next 5 -years. There are three levels of economic impact: None (0), Low (1), Medium (2), and High (3). The prioritization illustrated in the Matrix is based on staffs initial assessment and is intended to initiate discussion. Scheduling—For purposes of project timing the following time spans have been used: Short-term 20132018 Medium-term 2019-2025 Long-term 202E-2037 Project timing is further divided into two basic categories: Planning/Design/Engineering and Construction. PROJECT PRIORITIZATION MATRIX Priority Project Name Project Benefits Project Description Estimated Project Timing Prioritization Associated Projects Ranking for Coordination Bicycle & Improvements to street infrastructure 1- Planning/Design/Engineering, Short-term • No. 5: Intersection Pedestrian Safety on East Pune Street from Tenth to 2- Construction, Short-term through Medium-term Signalization Increased traffic Hamrick, including street widening, ,3 No. 7: capacity on East sidewalks, streetlights, street trees Underground East Pine Street Pune Street and additional signalization Tenth, Visual Impact Existing Pole Improvements • Community Image Peninger, Gebhard, and Hamrick. Plammng (2) Mounted Utility TO,- East of 10' . Encourages private ■ hnplcmcntation Systems Street investment 2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 Economic . No. 14: Economic Impact Development (1) Incentives No. 12: Misc. Public Utilities • Increased traffic Extend Peninger Road south across 1- Planning/Design/Engineering, Medium -tern • No. 2: East Pine capacity on East Bear Creek to collector street Street Pune Street standards to intersect with Hamrick 2- Construction, Long -tern. Private development driven Q hnprovements, East • Bicycle & Road. Improvements include right- of 1011 Street South Peninger pedestrian safety of -way acquisition, bridge crossing Visual Impact • No. 8: Gebhard 11 Road Extension and bike lanes. 1`1a (0)nning Road Extension . Improved access and circulation ■Implementation Economic • No. 14: Economic • Encourages private 2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 2043 Impact Development investment (0) Incentives • Promotes private Develop incentive programs that 1- Planning, Short -tern • Can be associated investment within facilitate private investment in the 5 with most projects. District Urban Renewal Area throughout the 2- Implementation, Short -tern through Long -tern Visual Impact Economic duration of the Plan. (2) 3 Development Incentives Plannin K Economic ■ lmplcmcntation Impact 2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 (3) • Bicycle & hnprove the pedestrian safety and 1- Planning, Short -tern • No. 5: Intersection Pedestrian Safety aesthetic appeal, which is necessary 2- Construction, Short -tern through Long -Lean Signalization • Reintorce to compete with newer commercial • No 7: pedestrian areas for private investment. JC Underground environment Implementation willbe addressedby Existing Pole Downtown Core preparing a master streetscape plan Planning Visual Impact Mounted Utility 1 Area Streetscape ' Community hnage that addresses the design and ■ lmplcmcntation 13) Systems Improvements • Encourages private establishes standards for curb and 2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 No. 12: Misc. Public gutter, sidewalks, crosswalks, street Economic Works investment trees, tree grates, street lights, Impact • : No. 14Economic mnderground utilities, plazas, (2) Development gateways, street furniture, corner Incentives extensions, traffic signals, and mise. public works. • hnprove traffic Extend Gebhard Road to local 1- Planning, Short -tern • No. 2: East Pine capacity of collector standards from the northern 2- Construction, Short -tern to Median Tern Street Hamrick Road limits of the Urban Renewal Area to 4 hnprovements, East • hnproved access, East Pine Street to relieve congestion Visual Impact of 101" Street Gebhard Road circulation, safety mid encourage residential mid (2) • No. 5: Intersection L� Extension commercial development. This Planning Signalization project would include design and ■Implementation Economic construction, including signalization 2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 Impact of Gebhard mid East Pine Street. (2) Construction tuning would be based on private sector development. • Livable, healthy Assist with the feasibility analysis, 1- Planning, Medium-term • No. 1: Downtown neighborhoods site and architectural design, land 2- Construction, Medium-term to Long-term Core Area • High quality acquisition, and construction of a 2 Streetscape recreation community center within the Urban Visual Impact Improvements City of Central Renewal Area. Participation is p Point • Community limited to the desir azrd Planning (1) • No. 3: Neighborhood Communityidentity h' development costs, including land ■ Implementation Sidewalks, Street Centex • Encourages private acquisition reasonably attributed to 2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 Economic Lighting, and investment serving the Area. Impact P Alleys (1) • Bicycle & hnprove streetscape elements to 1- Planning, Short-tern • No. 5: pedestrian safety enhance safety and gateway aesthetic 2- Construction Short-tern through Long-tern Intersection • Efficient, modern appeal by implementing an approved Signalization infrastructure master P g plan including but not limited • No. 7: to travel lane reconfiguration, curb 5 Underground • Promotes private and g gutter, sidewalks, street lights, g Planning Visual Impact Existing Pole wa Hi h99 investment for newtraffic signals, pedestrian lights, street ■ ]mplcmcntahon (3) Mounted Utility 2 Corridor and redevelopment trees and tree grates, traffic signals, 2013 2018 2023 2028 Systems Improvements undergroundutilities, gateways, Economic No. 12: Mise. plazas, crosswalks, mise. public Impact P Public Works works, and landscaping. (2) • No. 14: Economic Development Incentives • Stabilize Improve streetscape elements in 1- Planning, Medium-term • No. 9: Pfaff Park neighborhood residential neighborhoods north and 2- Construction, Medium-term through Long-term 2 Renovation Neighborhood property values south of Pine Street to stabilize Visual Impact • No. 12: Sidewalks, • Livable, safe, and property values and improve (1) Miscellaneous Street Lighting, healthy aesthetic appeal. Streetscape Public Works and Alleys neighborhoods improvements will include sidewalks, Planning Economic street trees and lighting ort residential ■Implementation Impact • No. 14Economic : • Community image streets and paved alleys. 2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 (1) Development Incentives • Promotes livable, hnprove park features including new 1- Planning, Medium-term • No.3: healthy landscaping, restroom facilities, 2- Construction, Medium-term 1 Neighborhood neighborhoods playground equipment and lighting. Visual Impact Sidewalks, Street Pfaff Park • Provides high The purpose is to enhance h) Lighting & Alley 8 quality recreation accessibility and recreation usefulness Renovation facilities for the surrounding neighborhoods. Planning Economic • Attracts resident ■lmplcmcntation Impact users 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025 2027 (0) • Community image • Maintains fire Prepare agreement with Fire District 1- Planning, Medium-term • None safety and livability No. 3 in addressing the Commission 2- Construction, Long-term 0 obligation to reimburse the Fire District for $1,010,518 in equipment Visual Impact 10 Fixe Safety necessary to maintain acceptable (0) levels of fire service within the urban Planning renewal district. ■ lmplcmcntation Economic Impact(0) 2013 2018 2023 2028 2033 2038 • Improved parking Design and construct two new off 1- Planning, COMPLETED • No. 1: Downtown for downtown uses street parking facilities on Oak Street 2- Construction, IN PROCESS Core Area • Efficient, modern and Manzanita Street to improve air 1Streetscape infrastructure quality and enhance aesthetics. Both Improvements Off Street parking lots are owned by the City Visual Impact • 9 Parking • Improved and are currentlyPlanning in an unimproved (1) Miscellaneous Miscellaneous ell Facilities environmentalcon Improvements include ■Implementation Public Works quality s parking surface improvements, curb parking 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Economic • Community image and gutter, stormwater drainage, Impact lighting, parking stall painting and (0) landscaping, and mise. public utilities.