Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Renewal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Garden City council approves formation of south‑Chinden urban renewal district
Summary
The council unanimously adopted a resolution creating a new urban renewal district on Garden City’s south side of Chinden after a presentation from the Urban Renewal Agency and its consultant, who said the district meets eligibility criteria and will consume most of the city’s current URA capacity.
Garden City’s council voted unanimously on June 9 to establish a new urban renewal district covering parts of the city’s south side of Chinden, moving the project to the planning stage for a formal urban renewal plan.
Denny Houston, chair of the Garden City Urban Renewal Agency, told the council the agency was asked by developers to evaluate a district roughly outlined from Glenwood down to Curtis Street and that Cushlon Associates and legal counsel Elin Burke were retained to prepare eligibility and feasibility work. Cushlon Associates principal Phil Cushlon presented the eligibility report and described the proposed footprint, which includes the stadium area, an RV park, county holdings to the river, and rights‑of‑way on Glenwood and Chinden.
"It basically consumes all of your urban renewal capacity for the near term," Cushlon said, explaining statutory limits on total urban renewal area. Cushlon told the council the city’s certified 2024 assessed valuation is about $2.7 billion and that the proposed district together with the existing River East district would represent roughly $274 million — about 9.84% of the city’s AV, just under the 10% statutory cap.
Cushlon also described technical elements of the eligibility analysis: staff reviewed roughly 350 parcels against 13 statutory criteria, looked at lot coverage and improvement values to identify under‑developed parcels, and explained that including rights‑of‑way is necessary because tax‑increment revenues must be spent within the district. He noted the district includes some unincorporated Ada County property, which state law allows only with an intergovernmental agreement and the county’s approval; Cushlon said the Ada County commissioners had approved the related resolution.
Councilors asked technical questions about how the base value for tax increment financing is set; Cushlon said the base uses the most recently certified AV (2024) and that 2025 values will not be certified until November. One councilor pressed for clarity on parcel counts and coverage, and Cushlon explained the assessor data methodology and that the team had analyzed vacancy, underdevelopment, and overlapping parcel records.
After discussion, an unidentified councilor moved to adopt Resolution 1207‑25 to form the district; the motion was seconded, and a roll‑call vote recorded unanimous approval.
The council did not adopt an urban renewal plan or specific investments at the meeting; Cushlon said the next step, should the council choose to proceed, would be development of an urban renewal plan and a financial feasibility analysis that would return to the council for review.
