The Hastings City Council voted to remove the designation of blighted and substandard from Redevelopment Area Number 12, commonly called the former Hastings Regional Center, citing changed conditions and ongoing state ownership of the site.

Planning staff presented a blight study and photographs of the site and said the redevelopment area had originally been designated blighted in 2009 when the city considered future redevelopment options while the state might have sold the property. Staff said many older structures have since been demolished and that the state currently owns and maintains the property; because state ownership means the parcel does not pay local taxes, it is unlikely to use tax-increment financing (TIF) or other local redevelopment incentives.

Nut graf: Staff and the Community Redevelopment Authority recommended de-designation because the property remains in state ownership and because many of the original blight factors (age/condition of structures) no longer apply after demolition and state maintenance. Staff said removing the designation would free about 162 acres of the city’s blighted acreage ceiling (the city has a 35% limit on such designations) so the CRA can designate other qualifying parcels.

Action and vote
- Motion and vote: Motion by Huntley, second by Hoffman; council approved removal of the blight designation 7-0.

Details and context
- Area and impact: Staff reported the action would open about 162 acres previously counted as blighted; removing the designation allows the CRA to designate alternative areas elsewhere in the city. - State ownership: Because the property is owned and maintained by the state and does not pay local taxes, staff said there is little practical value to retaining the blight designation for redevelopment-financing purposes. - Planning commission: The planning commission and CRA recommended approval; staff summarized that many older structures have been demolished and the original conditions underpinning the 2009 designation no longer exist.

Quote
Planning staff (Amber): “Since the property will remain in state ownership, it is unlikely for it to have redevelopment projects in the future. Hence, why the CRA wants to de-designate the area as blighted at this point in time.”

Ending
The council removed the blight designation and directed staff to update records; the action may allow the CRA to target other sites for redevelopment incentives going forward.