Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/28/1978 Adjourned Meeting 715 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING Tuesday, February 28, 1978 The City Council met in session on this date at 2:00 PM to reconvene as a Board of Equalization to hear protests to the assessment for L.I.D. No. 1001, Central Business District Improvements. Mayor Betty L. Edmondson, Council members Henry Beauchamp, Don Hinman, Ralph Holbrook, Jack Sparling, Nadine Walker and Gordon Wonder and City Manager Eastman and City Attorney Andrews present on roll call. Councilman Walker inquired as to the rules Council is abiding under and Forrest Walls, the City's bond and L.I.D. attorney, explained the Council's role as a Board of Equalization. Kay Chin, items #41 and #42, protested the parking and distance benefits II/ as being unfair. He stated he surveyed his patrons and they stated they are not parking in parking lot 1 or 2. Asked if he had any record of his property not being increased in value, Mr. Chin stated that the only time his business has increased is when he has a special. He also stated that he lost two parking spaces and one food pick-up zone for carry out orders. Asked if his property has been appraised by an expert, Mr. Chin replied "no". Fred Halverson, attOrney PP&L, item #101, stated that their assessment tripled from the original assessment roll to the final assessment roll. Mr. Halverson reported that PP&L has a parking right in the Mall Garage. Fred Halverson, item #76, stated that since the original assessment roll, he purchased that property and the use of that property will be changed to accommodate the Post Office. He stated that he will be providing 12 off-Street parking stalls for the Post Office. He believes that there has not been any increased valuation to his property because of the L.I.D. He stated that he had purchased the property at a reduced rate because of the assessment. He stated that he was in favor of the general improvements, however, he doesn't see the benefit the Post Office will derive from the downtown parking. He would like his assessment to be readjusted because he has provided 12 off-street parking stalls which were not considered previously. Mr. Halverson then protested the assessment of items #18 and #19, on behalf of John Webber. He stated that Mr. Webber does not feel that the valuation of his property has been improved by the amount of money assessed. He stated that Sunfair Chevrolet (business located on his property) provides their own parking because their customers just drive onto their lot. Dave Wilson, Sr., items #47, 124 So. 2nd Street, stated that he believes the assessment is too high for the benefits received. He stated that the assessment is equal to 1/3 of what the County has assessed his property. He stated that his block lost on-street parking and does not believe that his customers use parking lot #2 to park and then walk to II/ his business, as most of his customers are elderly. . James 0. May, item #97, protested the parking benefit assessment, stating that he feels he is providing parking for his tenants through the Mall parking garage. Councilman Holbrook asked at his opinion is (as a realtor) as to the valuation of his building. Mr. May stated that he doesn't feel the downtown redevelopment had any effect as far as increasing the valuation of his building. Councilman Sparling inquired if he would like to see,parking meters came back to help pay for the expense of the L.I.D., and Mr. May said "yes". Duane Anderson, item #82, Crystal Chrome Photo, 121 So. 2nd Street, stated he objects to the downtown redevelopment and the resultant assessment. He stated that his property has not increased in value and he lost 7 parking spaces by his business. He believes he should be eliminated from the assessment roll and improvements should be paid by the people benefitted by installing parking meters. FEBRUARY 28, 1978 716 Mr. Gilbert Lester, item #81, objected to the parking assessment stating that 13 on-street parking stalls have been eliminated by his business' ,in the downtown redevelopment, He also stated that the remaining parking spaces are being used by OIC students, thdrefore, reducing any foot traffic that might have decided to cane into his store and browse (Churchill's Book Lover's Haunt). He stated that his property has not increased in value and his business was down 33% in December. He stated he provides 9 parking stalls for his customers use. Lester Watkins, item #78, read his letter of protest dated February 27, 1978, giving notice that he withdrew from the L.I.D. He stated that most of his customers are in a hurry and don't take the time to walk a block away and most of the merchandise they purchase is too heavy to carry that distance. He stated he had two parking stalls in front of his business but now provides off-street parking for his clients and to his knowledge, has not received any parking credits. He reported that he paid $35,000 in 1970 for his property and it is currently assessed by the County at $40,000. He stated that he has been opposed to the downtown redevelopment from its inception as the cost appeared to be completely out of reason. Greg Campbell, Monterey Apartments, item #130, stated he had submitted his letter of objection previously. He stated that his tenants do not derive any benefit from the parking lots or the off-street parking because of the time limit. He reported that only 10 of his tenants own cars and they pay for monthly parking. Councilman Beauchamp inquired, if his assessed valuation has increased. Mt. Campbell stated that it has increased about $20,000 because of inflation, and inquired what the interest will be on the assessment. Forrest Walls stated that it is not known now, but he will guess it would be about 7%. Drew Johnson, item #79, stated that he has 28 parking stalls, which is adequate for his business. He stated he does not receive any benefits from the L.I.Dand is against the L.I.D. Hestated he is willing to pay for improvements on his lot and thinks the City should pay their share for the downtown improvements. He reported that he had paid $45,000 for his business which did not include the L.I.D. assessment. He stated he has been offered $60,000-$65,000 for his property; however, he would like to continue with his business and not be forced to sell because he cannot afford the assessment. Elery Van Diest, items #89 and #126, stated that he had originally protested the creation of the L.I.D. He stated that he owns two parking lots which have not increased in value and the Cityls free parking has hurt his business. He stated he paid for his parking when the Mall went in. Mayor Edmondson asked if he was objecting to the general improvements as well as the parking benefits and Mt. Van Diest stated that he was only objecting to the parking improvements. Councilman Walker asked if his parking business. has increased and Mr. Van Diest replied that it has remained about the same. Mt. Van Diest, item #95, stated that this assessment increased since the preliminary roll from $2,676 to $4,924. He stated that item #24 was assessed at $18,438 and has dropped to $18,211. He stated that he paid $28,000 for that property and thinks it is now worth about $30,000- $35,000. Speaking on item #68 on behalf of Jordon Van Patrick, he reported that the assessment dropped from .$13,760 to $6,322 and he still protests the assessment. He stated that he does not think he should have to pay for any of the parking benefits for the two parking lots he owns. He stated he did not thinkihe should have to pay for the City's mistake. Mr. Everson, attorney, introduced Marion Pierce, as his clients' expert appraiser, stating that he would be giving testimony on his clients' property value increases, in general. Mr. Pierce, as a realtor, stated that those businesses on Yakima Avenue have been improved a great deal by the L.I.D., while the improvements on the perimeter of the L.I.D. area is insignificant. He cited some instances where business owners have sold their businesses at a reduced rate because of the assessment. 717 FEBRUARY 28, 1978 Councilman Holbrook stated that Council is trying to prevent the erosion of property value in the downtown area and did Mr. Pierce notice a reversal in the decrease of property values. Mr. Pierce stated that it is too early to tell as there has not been enough sales. Mayor Edmondson stated that she had not heard any figures on any individual parcel. Mr. Pierce stated that he did not have a chance to get the dollar valuation in any form. Councilman Sparling questioned if property values have increased in general the last five years and Mr. Pierce stated that there has been some properties that have increased. Dave Wilson, Sr., item #47, stated that he purchased his lot in 1972 for $23,000 and his assessment is $7,041; therefore, he should be able to sell his lot for $30,041. He reported that the lot next to his sold for $25,000. II/ Jay Sentz, item #39, stated that he was not are parking credits were being given for inside parking and would like to read into the record that he will be given the opportunity to be credited for those stalls. Lester Watkins, it #78, stated that the prospective buyer of his property would not even consider assuming 1/2 of the assessment. Mayor Edmondson declared this portion of the hearing closed and stated that protests will no longer be accepted. It was MOVED by Hinman, seconded by Walker that Council reconvene as a Board of Equalization to discuss the protests and objections we have heard on the assessment roll for L.I.D. No. 1001, on Mbnday, March 13, 1978 at 9:30 AM in the Council ChaMbers of City Hall: carried, Beauchamp, Edmondson, Hinman, Holbrook, Sparling, Walker and Wonder voting aye by voice vote. Mayor Edmondson stated that all letters of protest will be duplicated and given to the City Council. For the record, those objections received by the City Clerk and no one present speaking to them at this hearing, were: Rayner A.- 0 - t, item #136 Elena Arralde, item #138 Republic Publishing Company, item #87 Thomas GrahO and John Morgan, item #85 People's Store, item #106 Lyle Pidgeon, item #80 Leone R. Sheppard, item #114 For the record, it is also noted that there was one person present and protesting at the hearing, for which a written protest was not received; that person being Paul Tarson, Brooks-Tarson Building, items #90 and #91. There being no further business to came before the Council, Mayor Edmondson declared the meeting to be adjourned at the hour of 6:10 PM, II/ 132 READ AND CERTIFIED ACCURATE BY ,)--.------ry------‘ DATE 1 1 =NCI ; . 7 1,N QU&L lo .0..., , AI t 4 A A A DATE COUNC 11,P ATTEST: L . _.. abl., L.Im■ 4 69' CITY a 74" - / ( MAYOR '