Revitalization Commission Agenda and Packet 2024 05 22

Home Browse Search

Revitalization Commission Minutes April 17, 2024 Page 7 of 9 The Director of Community Development noted that the business assistance package is not a "but, for" incentive because the applicant has already bought or leased the property. He suggested that this is a good criterion to include when we are trying to incentivize new businesses to come in. He noted that supporting existing businesses is a harder problem to solve because there may not be a but/for situation with existing businesses. Chair Adler asked what else is required. The EV Manager noted that the city can't approve construction without plans. A full application, detailed narrative, project rendering, and budget will be part of the application. Chair Adler suggested considering option 1 for expanding businesses and option 2 for existing businesses. There was a discussion around criteria and the EV Manager cautioned the LRC against creating a program for single -use cases. Deferred maintenance will need to be defined. For example, repaving a parking lot is just deferred maintenance. If they change the lot parking and add lighting as an upgrade, that's more of an upgrade. For flooring, if it's not ADA compliant, then it is an upgrade. But there are certain components of the floor that are just deferred maintenance. For example, refinishing floors is deferred maintenance. And an important point is asking if the project will increase property taxes by impacting the value of the building. Commissioner Williams commented that the recent increase of property taxes and completing upgrades that increase taxes will increase rents, which is counter to the mission of the LRC. She suggested considering interior improvements that are sustainable and will benefit existing and future tenants is important. The Director of Community Development suggested that the LRC focus on infrastructure rather than single users. He noted that this program was originally meant to address vacancies downtown. He suggested that this program could layer onto BAP to pay for infrastructure which that program can't fund. He also noted that this program has morphed into a downtown focus and the LRC needs to look at how it would apply to businesses within the entire URA, not just downtown. Chair Adler reminded the Commission that this is intended to be a pilot program and suggested they move forward with one of the options to determine its efficacy. She asked the Commission to provide support for one of the two options. Commissioner Harald supports Option 1 as a pilot program. Commissioner Tofte supports Option 1. He suggested the LRC track why projects are or are not approved to assess the usefulness of the program in the future. Commissioner Williams expressed a willingness to give Option 1 a try. Chair Adler supports Option 1. The Commission agreed that the proposed funding limits are fine to start the program.