Item B: MUPTE Boundary and Selection Criteria

Home Browse Search

Terrace were approved prior to the moratorium, but constructed during the moratorium period.) Council then directed staff to return with proposed amendments to the program as part of a series of “downtown tools.” In July 2003, the council approved a small expansion of the MUPTE boundary to include the City’s th development site at 14 and Olive (the future home of The Tate Condominiums) and directed staff to return at a later date with additional amendments to the program and boundary. In early 2004, during multiple meetings, the council debated the merits of setting more specific and stricter quality standards for MUPTE-approved developments and settled on the current approach, which provides a range of options to be evaluated by council prior to approval. The council voted to expand the boundary area for MUPTE-eligible housing and amended the rules to include quality standards and increased public notification requirements. The amendments also eliminated an annual fee that was paid into a low-income housing fund if at least 50% of the housing built was not low-income. This was done after some members of the council asserted that charging the fee reduced the incentive and ability to construct higher quality housing. In October 2007, the council reviewed the MUPTE program and asked for an additional work session. A motion to consider shrinking the boundary to the downtown, but including both The Tate and Co-Housing sites was approved with the council specifically expressing a willingness to continue the discussion about the boundary once more information is received from staff. Other council comments included an interest in expanding the boundary and options to make the selection criteria more objective than subjective. In November 2007, when discussing two specific MUPTE requests, additional questions about the program were raised. Responses to the questions raised at the October and November 2007 meetings are provided below. Issues raised by City Councilors in October and November 2007 Because new multi-family housing is not occurring in west Eugene and low-income housing is limited by the Housing Dispersal Policy, could the boundary extend to the Four Corners and Trainsong area? Response: The MUPTE boundary can be extended and a map showing this option is included as Attachment C-3. The Housing Dispersal Policy discourages City subsidy assistance for family housing in low-income thth neighborhoods. The 6, 7, and Trainsong areas are specifically impacted by the policy. Is the MUPTE tool needed in the West University area and how much of a role should the City take on to encourage quality development? Are there quality standards that could be changed or added to the list? Response: West University is coming out of a long period with little rehabilitation or new construction activity. How long the period lasts depends entirely on economic factors. Appraisers acknowledge that some multi-family construction is currently economically possible without MUPTE, depending on the price paid for the land. This is evidenced by two recent developments that did not request MUPTE. Appraisers also note that the overall quality of the West University neighborhood has suffered from the previous uses of inexpensive construction and the same experience may be repeated if left only to market forces. Attachment D is a proposal for new selection criteria with objective standards that include incentives for higher quality. Was the original intent of the program to promote compact urban growth and infill? Y:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080527\S080527B.doc