CC Minutes - 04/14/08 City Council Meeting

Home Browse Search

7. ACTION: Resolution 4938 Approving a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for Residential Property th Located at 693 East 16 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (Corey Development, LLC) Councilor Pryor, seconded by Councilor Bettman, moved to adopt Resolution 4938 approv- ing a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for residential property located at 693 East th 16 Avenue, Eugene, Oregon (Corey Development, LLC). th Councilor Clark observed that the councilors had heard much of the discussion on the development on 19 Avenue and Alder Street and that Councilor Zelenka had suggested that perhaps a MUPTE could apply there so that the developer would not have to build a seven-story building to have a profitable project. He said in consideration of the projects before the council and particularly the second one, which had taken into consideration being context sensitive to the neighborhood, use of the MUPTE was the only way for the projects to pencil out as they were presented. He averred that opposition to granting the MUPTE in either case was a de facto indication that the council would prefer very tall buildings, which would be “the only thing that would then be profitable.” He was concerned about sending this message. Councilor Bettman opined that a tax exemption was not about how “personable or involved in the community” a developer may be. She averred that it was irrelevant to the decision to “forego needed tax revenue.” She said the project was for housing in the University district that would serve the University. She felt the housing would be profitable and would be built anyway. She asserted that the City had a “proliferation” of tax breaks and that the “playing field” should be level so everyone paid a fair share. She believed tax exemptions were only warranted in special circumstances such as in the downtown core. Councilor Ortiz noted that the council had recently heard a report from Lane County Commissioner Faye Stewart on the county budget. She observed that tax exemptions did remove potential tax funding from the county and city coffers. She had voted for the Enterprise Zone and the Urban Renewal District activity downtown because she believed they would provide a public benefit. She was challenged to find a public benefit in the MUPTE applications that were on the docket. She noted her request for a work session on the MUPTE. She felt the council needed to revisit the tax exemption boundaries and consider changing them so other areas that feature decay, such as the Highway 99 North area, could be included. Councilor Taylor opposed the MUPTE application. She averred that the tax money was needed and she did not perceive a demonstrable public benefit in the projects the MUPTE applicants had set forth. Councilor Zelenka clarified that he had suggested to the neighborhood group opposed to the tall building th project at 19 Avenue and Agate Street that a MUPTE would be the wrong tool to use for the purpose of adjusting the design. He did not believe any of the projects that had been built without the MUPTE in the University area in the past three years had been over four stories tall. He said he would oppose the applications because he felt it was difficult to part with General Fund dollars in an era of budget deficits. He noted that the MUPTE was intended to create housing in the area. He related that the council had asked staff to look at projects created in the area. He stated that in the past three years 17 units had been built; of them only three had been granted a MUPTE. He surmised that it could not be said that housing was not being developed there. He could not see the public benefit to granting a MUPTE in that area. He supported reducing the tax exemption boundary and considering expanding it to other areas, such as the one Councilor Ortiz had cited. MINUTES—Eugene City Council April 14, 2008 Page 17 Regular Meeting