hailey urban renewal agency virtual special meeting july ... · 7/30/2020 · rph04480020010 810 s...

Hailey Urban Renewal Agency Virtual Special Meeting

July 30, 2020 11:00 AM

Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/794987933 Via Teleconference: +1 (408) 650-3123 Access Code: 794-987-933

Via One-Touch Teleconference: +1 (408) 650-3123

Chair: Larry Schwartz

Vice Chair: Don Keirn

Treasurer Becky Stokes

Board Members Walt Denekas, Martha Burke, Sandi Viau

Staff Support: Lisa Horowitz, Community Development Director

1. CALL TO ORDER 10:30 am

2. CONSENT AGENDA ………………………………………………………………………….…… ACTION ITEM

a) Approve bills since June 11, 2020 2. New Business:

a. Discussion of Eligibility Report for Hailey Urban Renewal District: South Woodside ……………………………………………………………………………...…. ACTION ITEM b. Public Hearing on the Tentative Fiscal Year 2021 Budget for the Hailey Urban Renewal Agency …………………………………………………………………….…. ACTION ITEM c. Consider Resolution No. 2020-006, amending Resolution 20-002 a Resolution adopting the Reimbursement Participation Agreement with Kiki Tidwell Family Trust U/T/A Dated 03/23/2006, Leslie Anne Tidwell Trustee….……. ACTION ITEM

3. Staff Report a. Review of recent Financial reports

4. Adjourn

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/794987933tel:+14086503123,,794987933tel:+14086503123,,794987933

Return to Agenda

INVOICE Supporting your building portfolio through balancing people, planet and prosperity Date: June 1, 2020

INVOICE #74003b

City of Hailey Lisa Horowitz

[email protected]

Amount billed to date $468.75

To

Project Manager Job Payment Terms Due Date

Sharon Patterson Grant Hailey HURA 30 days June 30, 2020

Units/Hours Description Unit Price Line Total

4 review Silver River HURA agreement and files, create draft template and send to Lisa $75.00 $ 300.00

0.25 check email, review HURA email and attachment to Meghan $75.00 $ 18.75

0.5 call with Lisa and Meghan about HURA for Silver River $75.00 $ 37.50

0.25 review Meghan's edits to HURA agreement $75.00 $ 18.75

0.25 review packet for May 21 HURA meeting $75.00 $ 18.75 1 participate in May 21 HURA meeting $75.00 $ 75.00

6.25 Total Hours

Total $468.75

Make all checks payable to Eco Edge

Eco Edge, PO Box 6205, Ketchum, ID 83340 Phone 208.440.1946 www.buildingecoedge.com

Return to Agenda

DATE: July 30, 2020 TO: Hailey Urban Renewal Agency FM: Lisa Horowitz, Executive Director RE: South Woodside Urban Renewal District Eligibility Report The Urban Renewal Agency contracted in March with Phil Kushlan to prepare an Eligibility Report for the South Woodside Area shown on the maps in the report.

Urban Renewal law stipulates that the total assess value of all Urban Renewal districts in a city cannot exceed 10% of the total Assessed Valuation (AV) of all taxable property in the City. Because the Gateway District (our current district) comprises 5.99% of the 2019 AV of the City of Hailey, the Board will want to carefully consider where new districts are created, as a new district will limit other districts in the near future. The proposed South Woodside District would add 3.02% (if both areas A and B are included), leaving very little AV for future districts. However:

• The 2020 AV will likely be higher. • The City will continue to grow in value, conceivable allowing for more Districts

over time: see the attachment from the Blaine County Assessor regarding the last five years of AV in Hailey.

Staff has also asked Kushlan and Associates to look at the possible AV of an Airport West District, also attached to this report. This potential district would comprise .68% of the 2019 Hailey AV. The Board can discuss the pros and cons of the South Woodside and Airport West Districts, as well as possible short-term limitations on other districts the Board may wish to consider/

Hailey Urban Renewal Agency

115 MAIN STREET SOUTH (208) 788-9815 HAILEY, IDAHO 83333 Fax: (208) 788-2924

$9,422,918 $9,483,315 $22,321,384 $23,516,775$37,707,326 $42,716,848

$1,000,132,584$1,057,005,924

$1,142,540,717

$1,263,565,653

$1,390,536,705

$1,524,149,986

$0

$200,000,000

$400,000,000

$600,000,000

$800,000,000

$1,000,000,000

$1,200,000,000

$1,400,000,000

$1,600,000,000

$1,800,000,000

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

City of Hailey Assess Valuation 2015-2020

URA Increment Market Full Value

BLAINE COUNTY

District Recap - 100 HAILEY CITYValues by Property Type

ABSTRACT OF REAL AND PERSONAL PRIMARY

OCCUPANCY & NON-OCCUPANCY ASSESSMENT ROLLS FOR THE YEAR 2020, COUNTY OF BLAINE

Property Year: 2020 DATA AS OF

Roll: Primary Date: 07/13/2020

Occupancy: All Time: 06:34 PM

Public Utility: Not Included

SELECTION CRITERIA

TAXABLEMARKET EXEMPTIONS

Property Type Full Value District Speculative Land Special Homeowner's Personal Property UR Increment Net Value

REAL PROPERTY $ 1,510,435,460 $ 0 $ -933,639 $ -1,550,192 $ -206,479,159 $ 0 $ -42,585,867 $ 1,258,886,603

PERSONAL PROPERTY $ 13,613,279 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ -6,679,290 $ -126,427 $ 6,807,562

MANUFACTURED HOME $ 101,247 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ -40,493 $ 0 $ -4,554 $ 56,200

DISTRICT TOTAL $ 1,524,149,986 $ 0 $ -933,639 $ -1,550,192 $ -206,519,652 $ -6,679,290 $ -42,716,848 $ 1,265,750,365

PERSONAL PROPERTY EXEMPTIONValue Code Description

$ -67,041 PPI* PP Increment

DISTRCAP Print Date: 07/27/2020 | Time: 12:07:26PM | Page 6

BLAINE COUNTY


ABSTRACT OF REAL, PERSONAL AND PUBLIC UTILITY PRIMARY & SUBSEQUENT



Roll: All Date: 01/13/2020

Occupancy: All Time: 10:12 AM

Public Utility: Included

SELECTION CRITERIA



REAL PROPERTY $ 1,369,516,994 $ 0 $ -864,864 $ -3,941,778 $ -203,451,122 $ 0 $ -37,476,427 $ 1,123,782,803



PUBLIC UTILITIES $ 6,316,735 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ -73,556 $ 6,243,179

DISTRICT TOTAL $ 1,390,536,705 $ 0 $ -864,864 $ -3,941,778 $ -203,491,472 $ -6,883,571 $ -37,707,326 $ 1,137,647,694




BLAINE COUNTY








SELECTION CRITERIA



REAL PROPERTY $ 1,241,472,652 $ 0 $ -2,526,290 $ -1,894,722 $ -193,146,659 $ 0 $ -23,274,884 $ 1,020,630,097




DISTRICT TOTAL $ 1,263,565,653 $ 0 $ -2,526,290 $ -1,894,722 $ -193,187,009 $ -6,920,682 $ -23,516,775 $ 1,035,520,175



DISTRCAP Print Date: 05/28/2019 | Time: 10:45:13AM | Page 6

BLAINE COUNTY






Occupancy: All Time: 12:16 PM


SELECTION CRITERIA



REAL PROPERTY $ 1,120,114,511 $ 0 $ -718,681 $ 0 $ -179,912,627 $ 0 $ -22,290,150 $ 917,193,053

PERSONAL PROPERTY $ 16,295,961 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ -7,055,073 $ 0 $ 9,240,888



DISTRICT TOTAL $ 1,142,540,717 $ 0 $ -718,681 $ 0 $ -179,952,977 $ -7,055,073 $ -22,321,384 $ 932,492,602


BLAINE COUNTY








SELECTION CRITERIA



REAL PROPERTY $ 1,036,038,474 $ 0 $ -718,681 $ 0 $ -166,542,707 $ 0 $ -9,462,689 $ 859,314,397




DISTRICT TOTAL $ 1,057,005,924 $ 0 $ -718,681 $ 0 $ -166,565,038 $ -7,114,474 $ -9,483,315 $ 873,124,416


BLAINE COUNTY








SELECTION CRITERIA



REAL PROPERTY $ 978,336,877 $ 0 $ -718,681 $ 0 $ -150,351,690 $ 0 $ -9,376,794 $ 817,889,712




DISTRICT TOTAL $ 1,000,132,584 $ 0 $ -718,681 $ 0 $ -150,373,302 $ -7,609,483 $ -9,422,918 $ 832,008,200


1 | P a g e

---DRAFT---

South Woodside Urban Renewal District

Eligibility Report

Prepared for

Hailey Urban Renewal Agency

June 2020

Kushlan | Associates

& SMR Development, LLC

Boise, Idaho

2 | P a g e

Introduction: Kushlan | Associates and SMR Development, LLC were retained by the Hailey Urban Renewal Agency (Agency) to assist them in their consideration of the potential South Woodside Urban Renewal District located within and adjacent to, the City of Hailey, Idaho. The Mayor, with the confirmation of the City Council, has appointed five members to the Agency Board to guide the development of urban renewal plans and oversee their implementation. The current membership of the Agency Board is as follows:

Chair: Larry Schwartz Vice Chair Don Keirn Secretary Steve Vlassek Commissioners Walt Denekas Martha Burke

Sandi Viau Urban Renewal Executive Director: Lisa Horowitz

Idaho Code § 50-2006 states: “URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY. (a) There is hereby created in each municipality an independent public body corporate and politic to be known as the "urban renewal agency" that was created by resolution as provided in section 50-2005, Idaho Code, before July 1, 2011, for the municipality..” to carry out the powers enumerated in the statutes. The Hailey City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1081 on April 11, 2011 bringing forth those powers within the City of Hailey. The Hailey Urban Renewal Agency (HURA) currently oversees the implementation of one urban renewal plan, the Urban Renewal Plan for the Gateway District Urban Renewal Project, which established the Gateway District revenue allocation area (the “Gateway District”). The Gateway District focuses on the revitalization of the downtown and adjacent areas. It was established by the City Council’s adoption of Ordinance No. 1183 on October 15, 2013. The Gateway District is set to expire on December 31, 2033, recognizing HURA’s intent to receive revenue allocation funds in 2034 as authorized by Idaho Code § 50-2905(7).

3 | P a g e

Map of the Gateway District:

Background: Native Americans visited the area now known as the Wood River Valley from prehistoric times during warm weather and fur trappers roamed the intermountain Rockies during the first half of the 19th century. The first mining claim was filed in the Gold Belt located west of the current city of Hailey in 1865. Active mining in the area started in 1879 with the first shipment of ore leaving the valley on July 1, 1881. Mining continued as a primary function focusing on the extraction of gold, silver and lead until 1890. In addition to the focus on mining, the region hosted one of the most substantial wool industries in the United States. The economy of the area has now evolved into a significant tourist destination. The town was founded by John Hailey who filed a homestead claim on the future townsite in 1879, increasing his claim the following year to 440 acres and establishing his new organization as the Hailey Town Company. The townsite was surveyed in 1881 and officially platted at the county seat in Rocky Bar on May 10, 1881. Blaine County was created by the Idaho Legislature on March 5, 1895 combining Alturas and Logan Counties and naming Hailey as County Seat for the new county.

1910 population 1,231 1920 population 1,201 1930 population 973 1940 population 1,443 1950 population 1,464 1960 population 1,185 1970 population 1,425 1980 population 2,109 1990 population 3,687 2000 population 6,200 2010 population 7,960 2019 population (Estimate) 8,501

4 | P a g e

Cities across the nation actively participate in the economic vitality of their communities through investment in infrastructure. Water and sewer facilities as well as transportation and other systems are all integral elements of an economically viable community. With the significant growth rate through recent decades and corresponding extension of infrastructure, Hailey has a significant amount of capital maintenance and capital improvements looming on the near horizon. Title 50, Chapters 20 and 29, the Idaho Urban Renewal Law of 1965 and the Local Economic Development Act, contain some of the few tools that are available to cities to help fund public improvements. New sources of State support are not likely to become available in the foreseeable future, thus the Agency’s interest in exploring the potential for establishing their second urban renewal district is appropriate. Demographics: According to the US Census Bureau, the estimated 2019 population of the City is 8,501 which is a 6.8% increase since 2010. This growth rate lags that experienced statewide which was 11.9% during that period. However, Hailey’s population has nearly quadrupled since 1980. At 29.4%, the City’s percentage of people under 18 years of age exceeds the statewide percentage of 25.5% by 3.9%. The percentage of population under 5 years of age lags the statewide figure by 0.3% (6.3% vs. 6.6%). The percentage of the City’s population over 65 years of age (9.4%) is less than the statewide percentage (15.9%) by 6.5%. These statistics reflect a population base that is considerably younger than that found statewide. The population is predominately white at 93.9% as compared to the statewide percentage of 93.0%. The Hispanic population of Hailey (34.1%) substantially exceeds that of the state by more than 21%. The state’s Hispanic population percentage is 12.7% Housing units are 60.2% owner-occupied as opposed to the statewide statistic of 69.3%. Median value of owner-occupied housing units is $348,200 as compared to $192,300 statewide. Monthly owner costs with mortgage is $1,505 as compared to the statewide figure of $1,228. Median gross rent in the City of Hailey is reported as $813 as compared to $825 statewide. When income statistics are compared to statewide numbers, we see that the population of the City lags the rest of Idaho in these categories as well. The median household income in the City is $47,288, approximately 11% below the statewide figure of $53,089. Per capita annual income for the City’s population is $22,473 as compared to the statewide number of $26,772. The percentage of the City’s

5 | P a g e

population below poverty level is 15.8% greater than the statewide number of 11.8%. These statistics suggest that the City’s population is in a challenging position as compared to many Idaho communities. The capital and service delivery demands presented by the significant level of growth, when considered in the context of the fiscal limitations on Idaho local government suggest that utilizing existing investment mechanisms such as found in Title 50, Chapters 20 and 29 is a prudent exercise of local legislative authority.

Statistics are derived from the latest United States Census Bureau Report. Steps in Consideration of an Urban Renewal District: The first step in consideration of establishing an urban renewal district in Idaho is to define a potential area for analysis as to whether conditions exist within it to qualify for redevelopment activities under the statute. We have called this the “Study Area.” The next step in the process is to review the conditions within the Study Area to determine whether the area is eligible for creating a district. The State Law governing urban renewal sets out the following criteria, at least one of which must be found, for an area to be considered eligible for urban renewal activities:

1. The Presence of a Substantial Number of Deteriorated or Deteriorating Structures and Deterioration of Site [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

2. Age or Obsolescence [50-2018(8) and 50-2903(8)(a)]

3. Predominance of Defective or Inadequate Street Layout [50-2018(9)

and 50-2903(8)(b)]

4. Faulty Lot Layout in Relation to Size, Adequacy, Accessibility, or Usefulness [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

5. Insanitary or Unsafe Conditions [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

6. Diversity of Ownership [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

7. Tax or Special Assessment Delinquency [50-2018(9) and 50-

2903(8)(b)]

8. Defective or Unusual Conditions of Title [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

6 | P a g e

9. Results in Economic Underdevelopment of the Area [50-2903(8)(b)] 10. Substantially Impairs or Arrests the Sound Growth of a Municipality

[50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)] If the Eligibility Report finds that one or more of the conditions noted above exists within the Study Area, then the Agency may accept the findings and forward the Eligibility Report to the City Council for their consideration. If the City Council concurs with the determination of the Agency, they may direct that an Urban Renewal Plan be developed for the area that addresses the issues raised in the Eligibility Report. The Agency then acts to prepare the Urban Renewal Plan for the new District and determines whether to also recommend the establishment of a Revenue Allocation Area to fund improvements called for in the Plan. Once the Plan for the District and Revenue Allocation Area are completed, the Agency Board forwards it to the City Council for their consideration. The City Council must refer the Urban Renewal Plan to the Planning and Zoning Commission to determine whether the Plan, as presented, is consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and make a corresponding finding. At the same time, other taxing entities levying property taxes within the boundaries of the proposed Urban Renewal District are provided a thirty-day opportunity to comment on the Plan to the City Council. While the taxing entities are invited to comment on the Plan, their concurrence is not required for the City Council to proceed with formal consideration. Once the Planning and Zoning Commission makes their finding of conformity and the thirty-day comment period has passed, the City Council is permitted to hold a public hearing and formally consider the adoption of the Plan creating the new Urban Renewal District and Revenue Allocation Area. The City Council must also find that the Base Assessed Value of the district to be created plus the Base Assessed Value of any existing Urban Renewal / Revenue Allocation Area does not exceed the statutory maximum of 10% of the current assessed valuation of all taxable property within the City. If the City Council, in their discretion chooses to proceed, they will officially adopt the Urban Renewal Plan and Revenue Allocation Area and provide official notification of that action to the affected taxing entities, County officials and the Idaho State Tax Commission. The Agency then proceeds to implement the Plan.

7 | P a g e

Analysis of the Study Area: For the purpose of this analysis the area under consideration for the South Woodside Urban Renewal District has been separated into two (2) sub-areas. South Woodside A is the area currently located within the corporate limits of the City of Hailey and is developed as light industrial uses. South Woodside B is represented by the larger agricultural portion of the Study Area currently outside the Hailey corporate limits and Area of City Impact (ACI), within unincorporated Blaine County. This separation was done for ease of analysis as the character of the sub-areas is substantially different with different statutory requirements being applied to open land as opposed to previously developed areas. Additionally, the process for modifying the City of Hailey Area of City Impact (ACI) has yet to be fully completed. While there is an expectation that the process will ultimately conclude as currently envisioned, the property in question remains outside the City of Hailey planning authority and until that is fully resolved, adequate findings of eligibility are unlikely to withstand scrutiny. Description of the South Woodside A Urban Renewal District Study Area (Study Area): The Study Area subject to the current review is located primarily in the extreme southerly part of the City and consists of two distinct sub-areas. The first, South Woodside A, is a developed light industrial area. Initially the Study Area contained 97 parcels located on 26.76 acres with 54 separate owners-of-record. Seven (7) of those parcels are owned by public entities and, thus, are statutorily exempt from property taxes. One parcel is owned by a private school and is also exempt from property taxes. Five (5) single family residences exist along the west side of Glenbrook Drive. Two of those residences are owned by ARCH Community Housing Trust, Inc., a non-profit corporation, that has applied for and received exemption from property taxes. Two (2) of the residences reflect the Idaho State Homeowner Property Tax Exemption, indicating they serve as the primary residence of the owner. One residence has no homeowner exemption noted and thus is assumed to serve as an investment property. Upon discussion with Agency staff, it was concluded that the five (5) residential properties mentioned above and located at the extreme Northwest corner of the Study Area should be eliminated from further consideration as their contribution to the district would be minimal. The corporate offices of Power Engineers, Incorporated is located in the extreme northerly section of the Study Area as well as a number of surface parking lots serving those corporate offices. The balance of the developed section of the Study Area is a mixture of light industrial uses of varying ages, vacant land and municipal uses, the largest of which is the City’s wastewater treatment plant located at the extreme southerly edge of the developed industrial area.

8 | P a g e

Table 1 reflects the data for each of the remaining 92 tax parcels represented in the Study Area: Table 1

Study Area -South Woodside - A Tax Parcel Site Address Acres Land Value Improvement

Value Total Value

% Impr. Value /

Land Value

RPH04750390030 0.16 $146,142 $10,000 $156,142 7% RPH04750390040 1061 Meadow

Mountain Dr. 0.14 $124,491 $10,000 $134,491 8%

RPH04750390050 1051 Meadow Mountain Dr

0.14 $124,491 $10,000 $134,491 8%


0.14 $124,491 $10,000 $134,191 8%


0.14 $124,491 $10,000 $134,491 8%


0.14 $124,491 10,000 $134,491 8%


0.14 $124,491 $10,000 $134,491 8%


0.14 $124,491 $10,000 $134,491 8%


0.23 $157,914 $10,000 $167,914 6%

RPH04750390130 3830 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $124,491 $10,000 $134,491 8% RPH04750390120 0.14 $129,910 $10,000 $139,910 8%

RPH0475084003A 1020 Meadow Mountain Dr

1.02 $648,246 $414,021 $1,062,267 64%

RPH0475084002A 3971 Woodside

Blvd. 0.86 $543,589 $1,926,522 $2,470,111 354%

RPH0475084001A 3940 Glenbrook Dr 1.5 $837,868 $2,495,951 $3,333,819 298% RPH0475041016A 3931 Glenbrook Dr 0.39 $265,710 $192,885 $458,595 73% RPH04750410180 3941 Glenbrook Dr 0.21 $192,149 $136,803 $328,952 71%

RPH04750410190 4041 Woodside

Blvd 0.82 $516,948 $360,073 $877,021 70%

RPH04750420380 ** 4021 Glenbrook Dr

0.95 Exempt Exempt Exempt

RPH047500000AA ***

1020 Woodside Blvd

Exempt Exempt Exempt

RPH04750420370 4031 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $124,491 $206,504 $330,995 166% RPH04750420360 4041 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $124,491 $222,910 $347,401 179% RPH0475042035A 4051 Glenbrook Dr 0.16 $141,632 $81,026 $222,658 57% RPH0475042034A 4111 Glenbrook Dr 0.16 $145,235 $451,890 $597,125 311% RPH04750420330 4121 Glenbrook Dr 0.16 $140,728 $87,441 $228,169 62% RPH04750420320 4031 Glenbrook DR 0.15 $135,314 $140,919 $276,233 104% RPH04750420310 4141 Glenbrook Dr 0.15 $134,414 $87,060 $221,474 65% RPH04750420300 4151 Glenbrook Dr 0.15 $134,414 $145,684 $280,098 108% RPH04750420290 4161 Glenbrook Dr 0.15 $138,022 0 $138,022 0% RPH04750420280 4171 Glenbrook Dr 0.18 $159,674 $132,736 $292,410 83% RPH04750420270 4181 Glenbrook Dr 0.18 $163,283 0 $163,283 0% RPH04750420260 4211 Glenbrook Dr 0.16 $143,434 0 $143,434 0% RPH04750420240 4241 Glenbrook Dr 0.28 $192,245 $253,130 $445,375 132% RPH04750420220 4251 Glenbrook Dr 0.29 $201,856 $73,232 $275,088 36% RPH04750420210 4271 Glenbrook Dr 0.22 $195,755 0 $195,755 0% RPH0475042019A 4281 Glenbrook Dr 0.61 4389,455 $95,495 $484,950 25%

9 | P a g e

RPH0475042017A *** 4297 Glenbrook Dr


RPH2N180230700 *** 4297 Glenbrook Dr


RPH04750420160 4299 Glenbrook Dr 0.28 $195,677 0 $195,677 0% RPH07230000000

**** 4301 Glenbrook Dr

RPH04750420140 4303 Glenbrook Dr 0.24 $163,407 0 $163,407 0% RPH04750420130 4305 Glenbrook Dr 0.24 $166,841 $234,404 $401,245 140% RPH04750420120 4307 Glenbrook Dr 0.15 $131,707 0 $131,707 0% RPH04750420110 4309 Glenbrook Dr 0.16 $140,728 0 $140,728 0% RPH04750420100 4311 Glenbrook Dr 0.17 $154,259 $124,105 $278,364 80% RPH04750420090 4313 Glenbrook Dr 0.17 $151,554 $40,055 $191,609 26% RPH04750420080 4315 Glenbrook Dr 0.17 $156,965 0 $156,965 0% RPH04750420070 4317 Glenbrook Dr 0.18 $162,379 $97,143 $259,522 60% RPH0475042005A 4321 Glenbrook Dr 0.52 $332,842 $354,453 $687,295 106% RPH04750420040 4323 Glenbrook Dr 0.31 $214,215 0 $214,215 0% RPH04750420030 4325 Glenbrook Dr 0.17 $156,065 $233,989 $390,054 150%

RPH04750420020 3940 Woodside

Blvd 0.17 154259 245244 399503 159%

RPH04750420010 3930 Woodside

Blvd 0.38 $260,902 $282,486 $543,388 108%

RPH04750460140 ***

3920 Woodside Blvd


RPH04750450080 3980 Woodside

Blvd 0.29 $199,111 $371,080 $570,191 186%

RPH04750450100 3970 Woodside

Blvd 0.14 $127,197 0 $127,197 0%

RPH04750450110 3960 Woodside

Blvd 0.15 $131,707 $197,354 $329,061 150%

RPH04750450010 3950 Woodside

Blvd 0.14 $129,904 $163,708 $293,612 126%

RPH04750450070 4030 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $128,098 $70,699 $198,797 55% RPH04750450060 1041 Mountain Dr 0.14 $123,588 $196,725 $320,340 159% RPH04750450050 1061 Mountain Dr 0.14 $125,392 0 $125,392 0% RPH04750430220 1060 Mountain Dr 0.28 $192,245 $292,281 $484,526 152% RPH0475044001B 4040 Glenbrook Dr 0.44 $277,056 $208,202 $485,258 75% RPH04750440150 4050 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $125,392 0 $125,392 0% RPH04750440140 4110 Glenbrook Dr 0.16 $140,728 $120,850 $261,578 86% RPH0475044013A 4120 Glenbrook Dr 0.15 $134,414 0 $134,414 0% RPH0475044012A 4130 Glenbrook Dr 0.3 $203,230 $294,832 $498,062 145% RPH04750440100 4150 Glenbrook Dr 0.15 $138,918 $65,953 $204,871 47% RPH04750440090 4160 Glenbrook Dr 0.18 $162,084 $129,615 $291,699 80% RPH04750440080 0.2 $176,810 0 $176,810 0% RPH04750430120 4190 Black Oak Dr 0.16 $140,728 0 $140,728 0% RPH04750430110 4190 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $121,785 0 $121,785 0% RPH04750430100 4300 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $124,491 0 $124,491 0% RPH04750430090 4302 Glenbrook Dr 0.15 $131,707 $122,465 $254,172 93% RPH04750430080 4304 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $124,491 $121,431 $245,922 98% RPH04750430070 4306 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $124,491 $132,673 $257,164 107% RPH04750430060 4308 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $124,491 $134,201 $258,692 108% RPH04750430050 4310 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $124,491 $92,897 $217,388 75% RPH04750430040 4312 Glenbrook Dr 0.14 $124,491 $99,807 $224,298 80% RPH0475043002A 4316 Glenbrook Dr 0.28 $191,558 0 $191,558 0% RPH04750430210 4040 Black Oak Dr 0.14 $124,491 $224,837 $349,328 181% RPH04750430200 4050 Black Oak Dr 0.14 $124,491 $48,637 $173,128 39% RPH04750430190 0.14 $124,491 0 $124,491 0% RPH04750430180 4130 Black Oak Dr 0.14 $122,682 0 $122,682 0% RPH04750430170 4140 Black Oak Dr 0.14 $124,491 $86,257 $210,748 69% RPH04750430160 4150 Black Oak Dr 0.14 $122,688 $131,759 $254,447 107% RPH04750430150 4160 Black Oak Dr 0.13 $114,568 $45,002 $159,570 39% RPH04750430140 4170 Black Oak Dr 0.13 $117,273 $120,171 $237,171 102% RPH04750430130 4180 Black Oak Dr 0.13 $115,470 $93,558 $209,028 81%

10 | P a g e

** Tax Exempt School *** City-Owned Property **** Condominium Common Area Assessed as part of individual Unit Values

Please see the map below for a graphic representation of the South Woodside Urban Renewal District Study Areas A and B

RPH04750440030 4051 Black Oak Dr 0.15 $135,314 $104,703 $240,017 77% RPH0475044004A 4121 Black Oak Dr 0.28 $194,303 $185,326 $379,629 95% RPH04750440060 4141 Black Oak Dr 0.28 $159,674 $129,140 $288,814 81% RPH04750440070 4151 Black Oak Dr 0.16 $141,877 $113,877 $255,509 80% Total Study Area

A 28.04 $15,210,813 $13,324,228 $28,535,041

A

B

11 | P a g e

South Woodside A South Woodside A consists of 92 tax parcels representing 28.04 acres (not including rights-of-way) located in the extreme south part of the City. It is located generally east of State Highway 75 and primarily south of Mountain Meadow Drive. It consists of industrially zoned properties along with a variety of public uses. The City of Hailey Zoning Ordinance defines the purpose of the LI Light Industrial District as follows:

4.8.1 Purpose. The purpose of the LI District is to provide areas for light industrial operations and limited related (or associated) retail sales. Limited related retail sales is defined as restricted to retail sales clearly associated with and secondary to the permitted use and of the type not normally located in downtown business districts (e.g., the retail sale of auto parts by an auto dealership). The area is characterized by industrial and service type traffic usage and patterns, and light manufacturing or construction related services. The intent is to group these uses that demand similar circulation patterns, and service requirements together and provide regulations to preserve the integrity of the industrial uses while insuring the health, welfare and safety of the community.

None of the parcels included within South Woodside A have been used for agricultural or forestry purposes during the past three years, negating the requirement to gain specific consent of any property owner of such a property for inclusion in an urban renewal district. While both private and public entities have made significant investment in the northerly portions of the South Woodside A with improvements to the Power Engineers facilities and street and sidewalk improvements along Woodside Boulevard, a detailed review of the Study Area reflects a pattern of underinvestment and disinvestment over time. The American Institute of Appraisers suggests that an economically viable, developed property would reflect a ratio of 30% land to 70% improvements. After initial improvements are made, without continuing reinvestment, the improvement ratio declines; and as it approaches par, a condition of disinvestment or deterioration is assumed. Table 1 above shows that approximately 50% (41) of the privately held properties located within the Study Area either reflect this “deteriorated” condition or approach par (within 10% of par) (8 parcels) suggesting a “deteriorating” condition. Another 22% of the privately held properties are vacant. Streets: As noted above, Woodside Boulevard has recently been improved with required curb, gutter, drainage, and pedestrian facilities. Signalization of the intersection of Woodside Boulevard with State Highway 75 has been installed as recommended in City transportation planning documents. However, the balance of the street network within the study area consists of an asphalt mat paving with no curb and gutter, allowing the pavement edge to ravel creating an uneven verge with the gravel shoulder.

12 | P a g e

Storm Drainage: As noted in the section of Streets conditions above, the area is devoid of storm drainage facilities with the exception of the recently improved sections of Woodside Boulevard. This condition allows for the ponding of water during periods of snow melt and heavy rainfall, thus obscuring the uneven pavement edge creating a driving hazard as well as undermining the roadway base requiring costly maintenance. Pedestrian facilities: Investment has been made in the pedestrian facilities along Woodside Boulevard. No pedestrian facilities exist throughout the rest of the Study Area. This requires pedestrians to compete with through traffic and industrial movements jeopardizing their safety, especially given the condition of the streets as noted in that section. City planning documents envision an expanded residential presence in the area to the south of the current City limits within the South Woodside B Study Area. The introduction of the large number of residents anticipated will require the expansion of the pedestrian network connecting to the recently installed facilities to the north. Illumination: While streetlights are present throughout the Study Area, their placement appears inconsistent creating gaps between the lighted areas. This creates vision problems as drivers’ eyes must continually adjust to varying light levels. This can be especially dangerous in the future as pedestrian volumes increase in the busy area. Water: Beyond the general discussion of community water supply capacity during certain parts of the year, the water distribution system within the South Woodside A Study Area appears to be adequate to accommodate the vision for the area within City planning documents. Fire Protection: Fire hydrants exist throughout the Study Area, however their placement appears inconsistent with spacing much greater on the westside of the Study Area than on the east. Given the industrial nature of the area, hazardous activities may be conducted within the buildings currently in the areas or planned. Thus, adequate fire flows are imperative. Sewer Collection: Sewer collection capacity within the Study Area appears adequate to accommodate current levels of anticipated growth within that area. Required Findings Regarding Eligibility for the South Woodside A Study Area: In order to make a finding that the South Woodside A Study Area is, in fact, eligible for being considered for the establishment of an urban renewal district, one must compare the conditions found in the area with the statutory criteria noted above. For the convenience of the reader those criteria are repeated here:

13 | P a g e

1. The Presence of a Substantial Number of Deteriorated or Deteriorating Structures and Deterioration of Site [50-2018(9) and

50-2903(8)(b)] 2. Age or Obsolescence [50-2018(8) and 50-2903(8)(a)] 3. Predominance of Defective or Inadequate Street Layout [50-2018(9)

and 50-2903(8)(b)] 4. Faulty Lot Layout in Relation to Size, Adequacy, Accessibility or

Usefulness [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)] 5. Insanitary or Unsafe Conditions [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)] 6. Diversity of Ownership [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)] 7. Tax or Special Assessment Delinquency [50-2018(9) and 50-

2903(8)(b)] 8. Defective or Unusual Conditions of Title [50-2018(9) and 50-

2903(8)(b)] 9. Results in Economic Underdevelopment of the Area [50-2903(8)(b)]

10. Substantially Impairs or Arrests the Sound Growth of a Municipality

[50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

Criterion #1: The Presence of a Substantial Number of Deteriorated or Deteriorating Structures; and Deterioration of Site: As noted above the majority of privately owned properties within the South Woodside A Study Area reflect improvement values less than land values. Additional parcels reflect values that approach that point where land values exceed improvement values. Nearly one quarter of the parcels remain vacant. This suggests that deteriorated or deteriorating structures exist or properties are vacant. Therefore, Criterion #1 is met. Criterion #2: Age or Obsolescence: Substantial investment has been made in the northerly portion of the Study Area, but the majority of the Study Area south of Woodside Boulevard is either vacant land or industrial properties reflecting disinvestment. Therefore Criterion #2 is met. Criterion #3: Predominance of Defective or Inadequate Street Layout. Adequate right-of way exists to accommodate the new investment consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. However, only one of the streets has been improved to full urban standards as required under City of Hailey development regulations. Full improvements to Mountain Meadow Drive, Glenbrook Drive and Black Oak Drive will be required to bring the infrastructure in the area in

14 | P a g e

compliance with current City requirements. The pedestrian system will need to be completed. Therefore, Criterion #3 is met. Criterion #4: Faulty Lot Layout in Relation to Size, Adequacy, Accessibility or Usefulness. The lots located in the Study Area are regularly configured and consistent with the requirements of City regulations. Therefore, Criterion #4 is not met. Criterion #5: Insanitary or Unsafe Conditions. The substandard condition of major portions of the streets, the lack of adequate storm drainage facilities, the incomplete street lighting system, the lack of adequate pedestrian facilities, and inadequate fire flows point to current unsafe conditions that will be exacerbated as development occurs consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, Criterion #5 is met. Criterion #6: Diversity of Ownership. The 92 parcels examined in this South Woodside A Study Area are under the ownership or control of 50 individuals or entities. Therefore, Criterion #6 is met. Criterion #7: Tax or Special Assessment Delinquency: The records of the Blaine County Assessor do not reflect any tax or special assessment delinquency. Therefore, Criterion #7 is not met. Criterion #8: Defective or Unusual Conditions of Title: No known defective or unusual conditions of title exist. Therefore Criterion 8 has not been met.

Criterion #9: Results in Economic Underdevelopment of the Area: The northerly portion of the Study Area has seen investment in recent years. However, the majority of the land within the Study Area remains underutilized and, in some cases, we see deteriorating uses. Therefore, Criterion #9 is met. Criterion #10: Substantially Impairs or Arrests the Sound Growth of a Municipality. The Study Area represents one of only two areas zoned for industrial uses in the City of Hailey. The other and smaller area is heavily impacted by the operational requirements of the Friedman Memorial Airport. The Study Area is the only reasonable location to expand uses needed to support a growing area economy. Therefore, Criterion #10 is met. Findings: South Woodside A Study Area: Conditions exist within the Study Area to allow the Board of Commissioners of the Agency and the City Council to determine that the area is eligible for urban renewal activities as prescribed in State Law.

15 | P a g e

Criteria Met Not

Met 1 The Presence of a Substantial Number of Deteriorated

or Deteriorating Structures; and Deterioration of Site X

2 Age or Obsolescence X 3 Predominance of Defective or Inadequate Street

Layout X

4 Faulty Lot Layout in Relation to Size, Adequacy, Accessibility or Usefulness

X

5 Insanitary or Unsafe Conditions X 6 Diversity of Ownership X 7 Tax or Special Assessment Delinquency X 8 Defective or unusual condition of title

X

9 Results in Economic Underdevelopment of the Area X 10 Substantially Impairs or Arrests the Sound Growth of

a Municipality X

Analysis: Open Land Conditions: The parcels located within the South Woodside A Study Area have been located within the City limits of Hailey for decades and have been dedicated to various urban uses. Therefore, the provisions of Idaho Code Section 50-2903(8)(c) and 50-2008(d) do not apply. Conclusion: Based upon our review of the data and the conditions that exist within the Study Area as noted above, one or more of the necessary criteria have been met and therefore the Hailey City Council may, determine that the South Woodside A Study Area, as proposed, is eligible for the establishment of an urban renewal district. Other Relevant Issues: Agricultural Landowners Concurrence: The statutory provisions concerning the creation of an urban renewal district prohibit inclusion of any land used for an agricultural operation without the express written consent of the property owner. An agricultural operation is broadly defined in Idaho Code § 22-4502(2) and means “an activity or condition that occurs in connection with the production of agricultural products for food, fiber, fuel and other lawful uses…” One method of determining whether there exists an agricultural operation on a parcel is the presence of an agricultural property tax exemption1. None of the parcels within South Woodside A maintains an agricultural land property tax exemption. Agency staff have further confirmed there are no agricultural

1 With House Bill 560 (2020) effective July 1, 2020, eliminating the property tax exemption for agricultural land and replacing it with a method to value agricultural land, going forward the method to determine the existence of an agricultural operation will change.

16 | P a g e

operations within the South Woodside A Study Area. Given that no agricultural operations exist nor have existed during the previous three years, property owner consent is not required. 10% Analysis: In addition to the findings reported above, we also sought to verify that the assessed value of the proposed South Woodside A Study Area is within the statutory limits. As noted above, State Law limits the percentage of assessed value that can be included in urban renewal / revenue allocation districts to 10% of the assessed valuation of all taxable property within the City. According to Blaine County Assessor records, the 20192 certified value for the City is $1,126,647,293. The 2019 taxable value of the South Woodside A Study Area is $28,565,041 representing 2.53% of the total City assessed taxable value. The Base Assessed Value of the Gateway District is $67,496,712. The Table below shows the result compared to the statutory requirement.

Statutory 10% Limitation Analysis Area Base Assessed

Value Percentage

Total City $1,126,647,293 100% • Gateway District $67,496,712 5.99% • Proposed South Woodside A District $28,535,041 2.53%

Total UR Base Assessed Value Percentage $96,031,753 8.52% We also explored the effect of creating this district on the capacity of the Urban Renewal Agency to consider future districts should they choose to do so. The table below shows that even if a new district similar to South Woodside A District were to be established, approximately 1.48% of the citywide assessed value would remain uncommitted.

Remaining Urban Renewal Capacity • Maximum 10% Limitation $112,664,729 10% • Gateway District $67,496,715 5.99% • Proposed Woodside A District $28,535,041 2.53%

• Total AV in Revenue Allocation Areas $96,031,753 8.52% • Available AV under limitation $16,632,976 1.48%

2 At the time this Eligibility Study was drafted the 2020 assessed taxable values had not been equalized. For purposes of this Eligibility Study the 2019 certified values were used to establish compliance with the 10% limitation. Even assuming an increase in values for 2020, the combined adjusted base values of the Gateway District and the full Study Area would not exceed 10% of the current assessed taxable value for the entire City.

17 | P a g e

South Woodside B Description of the South Woodside B Urban Renewal District Study Area: The South Woodside B Study Area is occupied by a large undeveloped area traditionally dedicated to agricultural uses. Those uses continue to date. The Area consists of a portion of a 615.29 acre parcel known locally as the Eccles Flying Hat Ranch. Current City planning calls for an extension of the light industrial area to the south. Additionally, the plan envisions approximately 15.1 acres of medium-density residential uses as well as a large area dedicated to park and open space uses as well as a large area designated for Community Agricultural and Open Space Resources. South Woodside B is part of a larger 615.29-acre parcel that sits to the south of the current city limits of Hailey and extends across State Highway 75 and north along the west side of Friedman Memorial Airport to a point just south of Airport Way. The area within the Study Area designated as South Woodside B represents that portion of the tax parcel to the east side of State Highway 75 consisting of approximately 111.8 acres. Given that State Tax Commission Rules discourage the inclusion of less than complete tax lots in an urban renewal district boundary, the Study Area would need to be subdivided into a separate tax parcel or parcels for inclusion in a district. Additionally, as noted above, the entire area of South Woodside B is located within unincorporated Blaine County and currently outside the Hailey Area of City Impact (ACI). Efforts are underway to modify the ACI to include this area within the City of Hailey planning jurisdiction through inclusion in the ACI. City officials have moved the issue forward to the Blaine County Board of Commissioners for their concurrence, but that process remains pending at the time this report was written. City staff is confident in the ultimate concurrence of the County, but the timing is uncertain. Therefore, we will move forward with this analysis with the understanding that the information contained herein is contingent upon the ultimate inclusion of South Woodside B within the Hailey ACI and the extension of the Hailey Comprehensive Plan vision for the area. Additionally, since the area within South Woodside B is undeveloped and currently under agricultural use, inclusion of the property within an urban renewal district will require the formal concurrence of the property owner. Further, unless the area within the South Woodside B Study Area is annexed into the City prior to the creation of the urban renewal district, an intergovernmental agreement between the City of Hailey and Blaine County will be required to approve the Plan.

18 | P a g e

As of this date, the assessed values currently ascribed to the property reflect an agricultural land exemption authorized under Idaho law. Prior to the adoption of House Bill 560 during the 2020 Legislative Session, effective July 1, 2020, at such time that the property would transition from agricultural uses, thus eliminating the agricultural exemption, the resultant increase in taxable value would accrue to the Base Assessed Value and not to the Incremental Value. House Bill 560 eliminated the property tax exemption for agricultural land and replaced it with a method to value agricultural land. On and after July 1, 2020, the elimination of the agricultural exemption will change the allocation of value between the base assessed value and the incremental value. For purposes of this Eligibility Study, a conservative approach has been applied allocating any increase in taxable value from a change in use to the base value, which could impact the 10% limitation. For this calculation we will need to estimate the value of the land after the exemption expires to properly calculate the impact of this district on the statutory 10% assessed value limitation. The estimated values used below reflect the average per square foot assessed values of currently undeveloped property (residential and industrial) inside the city of Hailey, using Blaine County Assessor data.

Study Area South Woodside – B (With Agricultural Exemption) RP02N18026366C 11378 State Highway 75 111.8 $12,289 0 $12,289

Total 111.8 $12,289 0 $12,289

Study Area South Woodside – B (Without Agricultural Exemption) Planned Use Acres Square Feet Value / sq. Foot Estimated Value

Mid-Density Residential 15.1 657,756 $2.96 $1,946,958 Light Industrial 26 1,132,560 $3.17 $3,590,215 Park Space / Buffer 17.4 757,944 Exempt / Public Land 0 Park Space / Buffer 9.5 413,820 Exempt / Public Land 0 Park Space Buffer 10.6 461,736 Exempt / Public Land 0 Community Agriculture / Open Space 33.2 1,446,192 Exempt / Public Land 0 Grand Total 111.8 3,079,692 $5,537,173 Required Findings Regarding Eligibility for the South Woodside B Study Area: In order to make a finding that the South Woodside B Study Area is, in fact, eligible for being considered for the establishment of an urban renewal district, one must compare the conditions found in the area with the statutory criteria noted above. For the convenience of the reader those criteria are repeated here:

1. The Presence of a Substantial Number of Deteriorated or Deteriorating Structures and Deterioration of Site [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

2. Age or Obsolescence [50-2018(8) and 50-2903(8)(a)]

3. Predominance of Defective or Inadequate Street Layout [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

19 | P a g e

4. Faulty Lot Layout in Relation to Size, Adequacy, Accessibility or

Usefulness [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

5. Insanitary or Unsafe Conditions [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

6. Diversity of Ownership [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

7. Tax or Special Assessment Delinquency [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

8. Defective or Unusual Conditions of Title [50-2018(9) and 50-

2903(8)(b)]

9. Results in Economic Underdevelopment of the Area [50-2903(8)(b)]

10. Substantially Impairs or Arrests the Sound Growth of a Municipality [50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b)]

Criterion #1: The Presence of a Substantial Number of Deteriorated or Deteriorating Structures; and Deterioration of Site: As noted above the entirety of the South Woodside B Study Area is currently used as agricultural land and has no structures on the property. Therefore, Criterion #1 is not met. Criterion #2: Age or Obsolescence: Again, as in Criterion #1, no structures exist within the property under review. Therefore, Criterion #2 is not met. Criterion #3: Predominance of Defective or Inadequate Street Layout. While no street network is needed to support the current agricultural uses, implementing the vision expressed in City of Hailey planning documents will require a significant street system to provide access to the various uses designated where no such system exists at this time. Therefore, Criterion #3 is met. Criterion #4: Faulty Lot Layout in Relation to Size, Adequacy, Accessibility or Usefulness. The property under review is part of a much larger parcel that extends across State Highway 75. To implement the City plans developed for the area, the area will require division into individual lots-of-record that can be developed into specific projects over time. Rights-of-way to accommodate a robust system of local and collector streets will be required. Therefore, Criterion #4 is met. Criterion #5: Insanitary or Unsafe Conditions. Implementation of City planning policies relative to this property will require substantial investment in water, sewer, and drainage systems as development occurs consistent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Sufficient water system capacity will be required to ensure adequate fire flows to protect the residential and industrial uses envisioned. Therefore, Criterion #5 is met.

20 | P a g e

Criterion #6: Diversity of Ownership. The entire parcel is under a single ownership. Therefore, Criterion #6 is not met. Criterion #7: Tax or Special Assessment Delinquency: The records of the Blaine County Assessor do not reflect any tax or special assessment delinquency. Therefore, Criterion #7 is not met. Criterion #8: Defective or Unusual Conditions of Title: No known defective or unusual conditions of title exist. Therefore, Criterion #8 is not met.

Criterion #9: Results in Economic Underdevelopment of the Area: The entirety of the land within the South Woodside B Study Area remains underutilized and represents the primary opportunity for expanding the residential and light industrial base of the community. Therefore, Criterion #9 is met. Criterion #10: Substantially Impairs or Arrests the Sound Growth of a Municipality. The South Woodside B Study Area is immediately adjacent to one of only two areas zoned for industrial uses in the City of Hailey. The other and smaller area is heavily impacted by the operational requirements of the Friedman Memorial Airport. The South Woodside B Study Area is the only reasonable location to expand uses needed to support a growing area economy. Therefore, Criterion #10 is met. Findings: South Woodside B Study Area: Conditions exist within the Study Area to allow the Board of Commissioners of the Agency and the City Council to determine that the area is eligible for urban renewal activities as prescribed in State Law.

Criteria Met Not Met

1 The Presence of a Substantial Number of Deteriorated or Deteriorating Structures; and Deterioration of Site

X

2 Age or Obsolescence X 3 Predominance of Defective or Inadequate Street

Layout X

4 Faulty Lot Layout in Relation to Size, Adequacy, Accessibility or Usefulness

X

5 Insanitary or Unsafe Conditions X 6 Diversity of Ownership X 7 Tax or Special Assessment Delinquency X 8 Defective or unusual condition of title

X

9 Results in Economic Underdevelopment of the Area X 10 Substantially Impairs or Arrests the Sound Growth of

a Municipality X

21 | P a g e

Analysis: Open Land Conditions: In addition to the eligibility conditions identified above, the geographic area under review is also required to satisfy the “open land” conditions. Idaho Code Section 50-2903(8)(c) states: “[a]ny area which is predominately open and which because of obsolete platting, diversity of ownership, deterioration of structures or improvements, or otherwise, results in economic underdevelopment of the area or substantially impairs or arrests the sound growth of a municipality. The provisions of section 50-2008(d), Idaho Code, shall apply to open areas.” The eligibility criteria set forth in Idaho Code Section 50-2903(8)(c) for predominantly open land areas mirror or are the same as those criteria set forth in Idaho Code Sections 50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b). “Diversity of ownership” is the same, while “obsolete platting” appears to be equivalent to “faulty lot layout in relation to size, adequacy, accessibility, or usefulness.” “Deterioration of structures or improvements” is the same or similar to “a substantial number of deteriorated or deteriorating structures” and “deterioration of site or other improvements.” There is also an additional qualification that the provisions of Idaho Code Section 50-2008(d) shall apply to open areas. Idaho Code Section 50-2008 primarily addresses the urban renewal plan approval process and Idaho Code Section 50-2008(d)(4) sets forth certain conditions and findings for agency acquisition of open land as follows:

the urban renewal plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the municipality as a whole, for the rehabilitation or redevelopment of the urban renewal area by private enterprise: Provided, that if the urban renewal area consists of an area of open land to be acquired by the urban renewal agency, such area shall not be so acquired unless (1) if it is to be developed for residential uses, the local governing body shall determine that a shortage of housing of sound standards and design which is decent, safe and sanitary exists in the municipality; that the need for housing accommodations has been or will be increased as a result of the clearance of slums in other areas; that the conditions of blight in the area and the shortage of decent, safe and sanitary housing cause or contribute to an increase in and spread of disease and crime and constitute a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare; and that the acquisition of the area for residential uses is an integral part of and essential to the program of the municipality, or (2) if it is to be developed for nonresidential uses, the local governing body shall determine that such nonresidential uses are necessary and appropriate to facilitate the proper growth and development of the community in accordance with sound planning standards and local community objectives, which acquisition may require the exercise of governmental action, as provided in this act, because of defective or unusual conditions of title, diversity of ownership, tax delinquency, improper subdivisions, outmoded street patterns, deterioration of site, economic disuse, unsuitable topography or faulty lot layouts, the need for the correlation of the area with other areas of a

22 | P a g e

municipality by streets and modern traffic requirements, or any combination of such factors or other conditions which retard development of the area.

In sum, there is one set of findings if the area of open land is to be acquired and developed for residential uses and a separate set of findings if the land is to be acquired and developed for nonresidential uses. Basically, open land areas may be acquired by an urban renewal agency and developed for nonresidential uses if such acquisition is necessary to solve various problems, associated with the land or the infrastructure, that have delayed the area’s development. These problems include defective or usual conditions of title, diversity of ownership, tax delinquency, improper subdivisions, outmoded street patterns, deterioration of site, and faulty lot layout. All of the stated conditions are included in one form or another in the definition of a deteriorated area and/or a deteriorating area set forth in Idaho Code Sections 50-2903(8)(b) and 50-2018(9). The conditions listed only in Section 50-2008(d)(4)(2) (the open land section) include economic disuse, unsuitable topography, and “the need for the correlation of the area with other areas of a municipality by streets and modern traffic requirements, or any combination of such factors or other conditions which retard development of the area.” The conclusion of this discussion concerning open land areas is that the area qualifies if any of the eligibility conditions set forth in Idaho Code Sections 50-2018(9) and 50-2903(8)(b) apply. Alternatively, the area under consideration qualifies if any of the conditions listed only in Idaho Code Section 50-2008(d)(4)(2) apply. The parcel size, the lack of water and sewer facilities; a nonexistent access and internal street system; an inadequate storm drain system; and lack of fire protection, are all conditions which delay development of the South Woodside B Study Area. Based on the above analysis, obsolete platting/faulty lot layout and economic underdevelopment are conditions found in the South Woodside B Study Area, and therefore, the open land condition is satisfied. Conclusion: Based upon our review of the data and the conditions that exist within the Study Area as noted above, one or more of the necessary criteria have been met and therefore the Hailey City Council may, determine that the South Woodside B Study Area, as proposed, is eligible for the establishment of an urban renewal district.

23 | P a g e

Other Relevant Issues: Agricultural Landowners Concurrence: The statutory provisions concerning the creation of an urban renewal district prohibit inclusion of any land used for an agricultural operation without the express written consent of the property owner. An agricultural operation is broadly defined in Idaho Code § 22-4502(2) and means “an activity or condition that occurs in connection with the production of agricultural products for food, fiber, fuel and other lawful uses…” One method of determining whether there exists an agricultural operation on a parcel is the presence of an agricultural property tax exemption3. As of the date of this Eligibility Study, the entire South Woodside B Study Area maintains an agricultural land property tax exemption and appears from a visual inspection to be an active agricultural operation. As a result, property owner consent is required prior to final consideration of the proposed district’s creation. Planning Jurisdiction: As noted above the effort to include the area in South Woodside B in the Hailey Area of City Impact remains pending. Absent that process concluding, resulting in the inclusion of the property within the Hailey ACI, the South Woodside B Study Area would not be eligible for a district within the City of Hailey. Our findings noted above assume the successful completion of this effort. 10% Analysis: In addition to the findings reported above, we also sought to verify that the assessed value of the proposed South Woodside B Study Area is within the statutory limits. As noted above, State Law limits the percentage of assessed value that can be included in urban renewal / revenue allocation districts to 10% of the assessed valuation of all taxable property within the City. According to Blaine County Assessor records, the 20194 certified value for the City is $1,126,647,293. The 2019 taxable value of South Woodside Study Area B is $5,537,173 representing 0.049% of the total City assessed taxable value. The Base Assessed Value of the Gateway District is $67,496,712. The Table below shows the result compared to the statutory requirement.

3 With House Bill 560 (2020) effective July 1, 2020, eliminating the property tax exemption for agricultural land and replacing it with a method to value agricultural land, going forward the method to determine the existence of an agricultural operation will change. 4 As set forth above, at the time this Eligibility Study was drafted the 2020 assessed taxable values had not been equalized. For purposes of this Eligibility Study the 2019 certified values were used to establish compliance with the 10% limitation. Even assuming an increase in values for 2020, the combined adjusted base values of the Gateway District and the full Study Area would not exceed 10% of the current assessed taxable value for the entire City.

24 | P a g e

Statutory 10% Limitation Analysis Area Base Assessed

Value Percentage

Total City $1,126,647,293 100% • Gateway District $67,496,712 5.99% • Proposed South Woodside B District $5,537,173 0.49%

Total UR Base Assessed Value Percentage $97,858,032 6.48% We also explored the effect of creating this district on the capacity of the Urban Renewal Agency to consider future districts should they choose to do so. The table below shows that even if a new district similar to South Woodside B District were to be established, approximately 3.52% of the citywide assessed value would remain uncommitted.

Remaining Urban Renewal Capacity • Maximum 10% Limitation $112,664,729 10% • Gateway District $67,496,715 5.99% • Proposed South Woodside B District $5,537,173 0.49%


Impact of both South Woodside A and South Woodside B urban renewal districts on 10% limitation. We must further analyze the combined impact of proceeding with both of the potential urban renewal districts, South Woodside A and South Woodside B, either combined or separately, on the statutory 10% limitation. The following table reflects a scenario where both South Woodside A and South Woodside B are established as urban renewal districts within the city of Hailey.

25 | P a g e

Statutory 10% Limitation Analysis

Area Base Assessed Value

Percentage

Total City $1,126,647,293 100% • Gateway District $67,496,712 5.99% • Proposed South Woodside A District $28,535,041 2.53% • Proposed South Woodside B District $5,537,173 0.49%

Total UR Base Assessed Value Percentage $101,568,926 9.01%

Remaining Urban Renewal Capacity • Maximum 10% Limitation $112,664,729 10% • Gateway District $67,496,715 5.99% • Proposed South Woodside A District $28,535,041 2.53% • Proposed South Woodside B District $5,537,173 0.49%


Conclusion: As shown above, both South Woodside A and South Woodside B urban renewal districts are eligible for further consideration either as separate districts or combined as they both meet the statutory requirements for eligibility. Further, independently and combined, they remain under the statutory 10% limitation. Including both areas within a district or districts will encumber nearly all of the capacity for creation of future districts until termination of the Gateway District. 4845-7224-0833, v. 3

Memorandum to: Lisa Horowitz, Executive Director, Hailey Urban Renewal Agency From: Phil Kushlan, Principal, Kushlan | Associates Subject: Assessed Value Capacity Analysis Date: July 20, 2020 You have asked that I review the currently uncommitted assessed value amounts in Hailey as they pertain to the potential for creating new urban renewal districts. I had done that analysis to include the South Woodside A and B areas, but a new consideration of a potential district west of the airport was suggested that warranted whether capacity existed to allow consideration of that are as well. Attached, you will find the analysis that I conducted based upon the map you provided and the assessed value numbers from the Blaine County Assessor’s Office. Again, as with the South Woodside report, I have used the certified FY 2019 assessed values as they represent the latest certified values. Final 2020 values await completion of the work of the Blaine County Board of Commissioners sitting as the Board of Equalization. My findings are summarized in this memorandum,

Total City of Hailey Assessed Value (2019) $ 1,126,647,712 Maximum 10% of AV Limitation $ 112,664,729 Gateway District Base Assessed Value $ 67,496,715 (5.99%) Remaining Urban Renewal Capacity $ 45,168,014 (4.01%) Proposed South Woodside A District $ 28,535,041 (2.53%) Proposed South Woodside B District $ 5,537,173 (0.49%) Potential Airport West District $ 18,710,025 (1.67%) Value of Proposed and Potential Districts $ 120,278,951 (10.68%)

As you can see, the values associated with the two South Woodside Districts and the potential Airport West District would exceed the statutory assessed value limitation by $7,614,222 or 0.68%. Eliminating the Woodside B District would still leave a negative figure of $2,077,049. The 2020 certified assessments are likely to increase the total city assessed value and thus the amount represented by the 10% cap. However, the values of the properties in the Woodside A and B, as well as the values in the potential Airport West District will likely reflect similar growth rates thereby negating the additional capacity.

One option to consider might be reducing the extent of the Airport West District to eliminate the high-value properties to the north end of the area studied. This would potentially reduce the value of the Airport West District by $9,234,673. Please review the information provided and let me know if you would like to discuss these issues further.

Assessed Value Analysis - Airport West Properties (2019 Blaine County Certified Assessed Values)

Tax Parcel Number Address Owner of Record Acres Land Value Impr. ValueTotal ValueRPH04480020010 810 S Main St 1 United States Postal Service 2.01 0 0 0RPH0445002011A 920 S Main St Silver Creek Property Holdings LLC 1.45 $501,191 $410,810 $912,001RPH0445002011B 960 S Main St Silver Creek Property Holdings LLC 0.49 $169,258 $90,458 $259,716RPH04450020100 920 Airport Way Silver Creek Property Holdings LLC 1.0 $344,957 $0 $344,957RPH04450010070 921 Airport Way American Acceptance Corp 1.47 $508,450 $598,317 $1,106,767RPH04450020090 1020 Airport Way Spring Meadow L L C 1.0 $345,304 $6,265,928 $6,611,232RPH04450010060 1021 Airport Way Pioneer LLC 1.0 $345,304 $366,082 $711,386RPH04450020080 1030 Airport Way 1030 Airport Way LLC 1.0 $344,957 $297,134 $642,091RPH04450020060 1040 Airport Way Little Wood River Properties LLC 0.5 $242,421 $125,839 $368,260RPH04450010030 1041 Airport Way Valley Self Store LLC 3.0 $692,217 $1,014,799 $1,707,016RPH04450020070 1042 Airport Way Little Wood River Properties LLC 0.5 $244,368 $89,919 $334,287RPH04450020050 1120 Airport Way 1130 Airport Way LLC 0.5 $243,881 $0 $243,881RPH04450020040 1130 Airport Way 1130 Airport Way LLC 0.5 $243,394 $0 $243,394RPH0445001002B 1133 Airport Way Valley Self Store LLC 0.59 $285,258 $266,082 $551,340RPH04450020030 1140 Airport Way Griffin Z Wayne Jr Trustee 0.47 $227,816 $122,595 $350,411RPH04450020010 1220 Airport Way 1220 Airport Way LLC 0.63 $304,729 $158,367 $463,096RPH040000501A0 1221 Airport Way Jenson Russell B 0.35 $162,019 $170,750 $332,769RPH04450020020 1230 Airport Way 1220 Airport Way LLC 0.56 $274,549 $324,564 $599,113RPH040000501D0 120 Citation Way Airport West LLC 0.25 $116,070 $0 $116,070RPH040000501C0 131 Citation Way Jenson Russell B 0.27 $125,820 $76,176 $201,996RPH040000501B0 141 Citation Way Uranus LLC 0.58 $242,894 $1,010,476 $1,253,370RPH04000010100 Airport West LLC 2.54 $660,502 $0 $660,502RPH040000501E0 Michael Folks Showro Inc 0.63 $264,328 $0 $264,328RPH040000501F0 Airport West LLC 0.25 $115,606 $0 $115,606RPH040000502A0 1220 Aviation Dr Calgal Properties LLC 0.75 $316,436 $0 $316,436

22.29 $18,710,025

Percentage10%

5.99%2.53%0.49%1.67%

-0.68%

Total Airport West Area Value

Potential Airport West DistrictTotal UR Base Assessed Value Percentage

Base Assessed Value$112,664,729$67,496,712$28,535,041$5,537,173

$18,710,025

Statutory 10% Limitation AnalysisArea

Maximun 10% LimitationGateway DistrictProposed South Woodside A DistrictProposed South Woodside B District

($7,614,222)

Return to Agenda

Notice of Public Hearing Hailey Urban Renewal Agency

Proposed Budget for Fiscal Year 2021

A public hearing for consideration of the proposed Hailey Urban Renewal Agency budget for the fiscal year October 1, 2020 through September 30, 2021, will be held at the Hailey City Council Chambers, located at 115 Main St. S, Hailey, Idaho on August 6, 2020 at 11:00 AM, pursuant to Idaho Code 50-1002. Written comments may be mailed prior to the meeting to: Hailey Urban Renewal Agency, ATTN: Lisa Horowitz, 115 Main St. S., Hailey, ID, 83333 or emailed to [email protected]. Oral comments are welcome at the public hearing. City Council Resolution No. 2010-02 adopted on January 25, 2010, authorized the establishment of the Urban Renewal Agency. The Agency has now completed the urban renewal plan for the Gateway District, thereby establishing the baseline of assessed value according to 2014 values. The Agency expenses will primarily include capital projects, insurance, legal expenses and other consulting expenses in FY 2020. Those activities will be funded through the projected tax increment revenue of $250,000. The public hearing on the proposed budget is required for formal adoption of the FY21 budget, The City Council chambers are accessible to persons with disabilities. Actua l FY19 Budget FY20 Propos ed FY21 REVENUE Tax Increment Revenue $ 171,137 $ 170,000 $ 250,000 Other Revenue/Interest 7,699 5,000 5,000

TOTAL HAILEY URA REVENUE $ 178,836 $ 175,000 $ 255,000 EXPENDITURES Dept Service (Note to City of Hailey) $ - - - Professional and Legal 4,816 $ 25,000 $ 40,000 Administration & Insurance Expenses 9,057 8,700 10,700 Other Expenses 564 2,500 2,500 Capital Expenses 10,000

150,000 150,000

TOTAL EXPENDITURES $ 24,437 $ 1 86,200 $ 203,200 CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE $ 154,399 $ (11,200) $ 51,800

CARRY OVER FUND BALANCE $ 423,724 $ 412,524 $ 464,324 The proposed expenditures and revenues for FY 21 have been tentatively approved by the Urban Renewal Agency at the board meeting July 30 2020. Lisa Horowitz, Executive Director of the Hailey Urban Renewal Agency. PUBLISH IDAHO MOUNTAIN EXPRESS July 29, 2020 and August 5, 2020

mailto:[email protected]

Return to Agenda

From: Lisa HorowitzTo: Jessica ParkerSubject: FW: Bike Path Silver River HURADate: Monday, July 27, 2020 4:44:42 PMAttachments: image001.png

Please include this email in the HURA packet for Silver River. Lisa Lisa HorowitzCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTORCITY OF HAILEY115 S. MAIN ST. HAILEY, ID 83333208-788-9815 EXT. 1CELL: 727-7097

From: GARY POOLE Sent: Monday, July 27, 2020 4:11 PMTo: Lisa Horowitz ; Jessica Parker

Subject: Fw: Bike Path Silver River HURA Lisa, Here are the numbers from Conrad Bros. for the River Street portion of the bike pathimprovements. Gary

From: Brad Echeverria Sent: Monday, July 27, 2020 3:54 PMTo: GARY POOLE Cc: Paul Conrad Subject: Bike Path Silver River HURA Gary The Bike Area running North and South along River Street……

Prepare Bike Path for Asphalt 450 sf = $1,237.50Place 2” Asphalt on the Bike Path 450 sf = $1,350

Should you have questions or need further information please call,

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

Thank you, we appreciate your help, Brad Echeverria | Senior Estimator/PM/CACell: (208)870-1115 | Office (208)[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Return to Agenda

INVOICE 74003b Eco Edge Hailey HURA May20.pdfINVOICESupporting your building portfolio through balancing people, planet and prosperityProject ManagerJobPayment TermsDue DateUnits/HoursDescriptionUnit PriceLine Total

District 5yr Recap Comparision Chart.pdfSheet1

hailey urban renewal agency virtual special meeting july ... · 7/30/2020 · rph04480020010 810 s...

Documents