2019-03-20 EDA Minutes - Approved

Home Browse Search

City of Centerville EDA/P&Z Meeting Minutes March 20, 2019 4. Appointment of Member to Rebranding Committee Administrator Statz stated that with the Council’s goal of rebranding the City’s logo, City Hall upgrade, etc. he proposed to Council the organization of a Rebranding Committee where a member of Council, P & Z and EDA be appointed to an ad hoc Committee for ease of communication and narrowing down selection/focus prior to items being taken to the entire Council. He stated that the Committee would meeting face to face once or twice and then everything else should be through emails approximately once a month. Motion by Commission Member Giovinazzo, Seconded by Commissioner Love to Appoint Commissioner Weatherhead to the Ad Hoc Rebranding Committee. All in favor. Motion carried. 5. Discussion of Downtown Tax Increment Financing District a. Res. EDA #19-03 – Recognizing Council Support & Authorizing Occupied Structure Inspections Associated with the Beginning Processes of Exploring the Eligibility of Establishing a Tax Increment Finance (TIF) District (Redevelopment District) in the Downtown Area Administrator Statz stated that staff is requesting recognition of Council’s action to commence the beginning phase(s) of determining whether it is feasible to create a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district within the downtown area by determining whether it meets certain criteria to qualify for a district. He stated that there currently was a TIF district within the downtown area that has a remaining 11 years of its 25 year term (est. 2005). He stated that the intention is to decommission that district and commence a new district meeting the qualifications of the initial eligibility tests. He reviewed the qualifications of the area by stating that 70% of the area must be occupied parcels. He stated that the definition of occupied parcels is where 15% of the land area is covered by impervious surface parking or structure and the downtown area just meets this qualification. However, 50% of the structures in the same area must be considered “substandard” which the state defines as a building that would require at least 15% of the cost of a replacement building to bring the existing building up to current standards. He reported that most of the homes were constructed prior to the City’s adoption of the building code in 1983. He stated that the City must make a good faith effort to gain entry to the property, but if the property owner does not allow entry, the City can complete a “table top” review of the property for permits and etc. to determine whether it is “substandard”. He reported that a letter would be forwarded to the property owner requesting the inspection and follow-ups through telephone calls and door knocking. Administrator Statz reported that a timeline had been included in the packet and that staff discussed this with the City’s Financial Consultant. Discussion ensued regarding whether the inspection information was public information. Administrator Statz stated that he would bring that information to the next meeting. Page 3 of 4