Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Bettman said that there was a refinement plan amendment process in place. She did not think the age <br />of a refinement plan negated its value. Some neighborhoods had none at all, and the residents of those <br />areas would like one. She said as long as the refinement plan was in place, it should be respected. <br />Regarding the subject of refinement plan updates, she recalled that she had discussed the issue with <br />former City Manager Jim Johnson, who had suggested targeted updates of small neighborhood areas on an <br />as-needed basis, which would be more cost-effective that a full update. <br /> <br /> The motion passed, 5:2; Ms. Solomon and Mr. Pap6 voting no. <br /> <br />D. ACTION: Resolution 4816 Approving a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for Residential <br /> Property Located at 979 Patterson Street, Eugene, Oregon (Arthur C. Carmichael, Jr. and <br /> Larry Von Klein) <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman, seconded by Ms. Nathanson, moved to adopt Resolution 4816 approving a <br /> Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for residential property located at 979 Patterson <br /> Street, Eugene. <br /> <br />Mr. Lidz briefly noted changes in Attachment A of the agenda item summary made since the public <br />hearing. <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman, with the concurrence of Ms. Nathanson, the second to the motion, incorporated new <br /> Attachment A into the motion. <br /> <br /> Mayor Torrey called on the council for comments. <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman asked if the numbers provided by the developer were verified independently. Mr. Weinman <br /> said yes. He said the numbers provided were very reasonable and corresponded both to the City's own <br /> experience and to a survey released that day by the local firm of Duncan & Brown. <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman referred to the information provided by Mr. von Klein regarding Hilyard House and asked <br /> Mr. Weinman for more information about his assertion that the structure was built to the original <br /> specifications. Mr. Weinman said changes were made as a result of City regulations but those were <br /> largely interior. <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman indicated her opposition to the motion. She said that the City has plenty of rental housing in <br /> the area and she did not see a public need to give tax forgiveness to such a project. She said the <br /> Consolidated Plan for Lane County, Eugene, and Springfield identified the need to increase the rental <br /> supply of permanent affordable housing enhancing shelter support services for homeless households and <br /> increasing the supply of transitional and permanent housing for specialized populations. The tax <br /> exemption would not accomplish any of those goals. <br /> <br /> Mr. Meisner indicated support for the motion, pointing out the proposal involved the conversion and <br /> development of a surface parking lot in downtown Eugene into quality housing, which was precisely what <br /> the City's Growth Management Study policies encouraged. He said that the City's policies called for it to <br /> assist such development as well. He thought the proposal a perfect use for the area and noted the <br /> neighborhood residents worked with the developer on certain design elements, which was important to <br /> him. Mr. Meisner appreciated the fact the City's legal counsel deemed the conditions of development <br /> were enforceable. He was pleased to see the proposal. <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council December 6, 2004 Page 10 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />