Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> Mr. Stafford said he had always been a supporter of the tax exemption program <br />e and felt that in many cases, the provision of the housing per se was sufficient <br /> public benefit to qualify a project for the tax exemption. However, in the case <br /> of the Wasington Abbey project, Mr. Stafford believed a closer examination was <br /> called for. He said someone should have been looking over the developer's <br /> shoulder when he (the developer) decided to build 4-foot wide corridors that <br /> will not allow two wheelchairs room to pass; apartments that do not even have a <br /> view of the sky, much less a view of anything outside; lot units for the elderly; <br /> and the failure to include a ground level lobby for people to wait in. <br /> Mr. Stafford agreed that according to the standards and guidelines the project <br /> possessed an undeniable public benefit as it is defined. He felt the project <br /> should provide more. He said projects that receive the tax exemption are <br /> required to have a positive impact on the neighborhood. He did not believe this <br /> aspect had received proper consideration. He said to say that the Planning <br /> Commission dealt with this issue when it overturned the Hearing Official vastly <br /> overstated the case. He said having a minimal impact on the neighborhood was a <br /> long way from having a positive impact. <br /> Mr. Stafford hoped he had been able to convey in his written material just how <br /> large and massive this project will be. He said it was so large, that if it <br /> were proposed for the north side of the street, it couldn't be built. He said <br /> there was not enough volume within the space created by the sun exposure planes <br /> to allow this kind of density on the north side. <br /> Mr. Stafford said the question of neighborhood stability had not been adequately <br /> addressed in any of the previous deliberations. Tenure could be one measure of <br />e neighborhood stability and Mr. Stafford said the developers felt the tenants of <br /> Washington Abbey will remain in the neighborhood longer than is usual for the <br /> neighborhood. While this seemed possible to Mr. Stafford, he also felt that <br /> because the residents may be older that they may, in fact, reside there a <br /> shorter time than usual. <br /> If neighborhood stability is measured by the pressure placed on nearby properties <br /> for re-development, then Mr. Stafford felt Washington Abbey may prove to be a <br /> de-stabilizing influence on the neighborhood. He didn't feel that this type of <br /> project was what the framers of the Downtown Westside Mixed Use District had in <br /> mind when the ordinance was written. <br /> Mr. Stafford questioned whether some of the public benefits listed for Washington <br /> Abbey were more than were required by present laws, ordinances or regulations. <br /> If the council approves this project, Mr. Stafford said he hoped it was not <br /> encouraging policies of 75 percent lot coverage or putting required parking for <br /> businesses behind locked doors. <br /> There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. <br /> Mr. Hamel said advertisements for this project asked for $1000 which would be <br /> put in escrow. He asked the purpose of the $1000. <br />e <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council November 15, 1982 Page 4 <br />