01/18/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ e Mr. Obie expressed concern regarding design review and the additional cost to construction which would be passed on to the renters. In regard to Mr. Lieuallen's comments of the life of the structure, he said the City has a uniform building code, and if that code is not strong enough, then Council should change the code. He did not feel a design review committee would answer that question. Also, he did not feel it necessary to put any more red tape into the building process in Eugene, noting there were very capable architects and planners avaiable. Regarding the tax break, he said the City would get a tax break as beyond the ten-year exemption period, the development would be appraised at a higher value than it would have been otherwise. However, he expressed a concern regarding the $500,000 cost to the City and felt it important not to give up any more money than is necessary in order to attract this needed housing in this area. e In response to a question by Mr. Haws, Mr. Young said a problem exists in the lack of a definitive statement of exactly what constitutes public benefit. He said staff was hesitant to fix a dollar amount on a public benefit, but there will be a net gain for the City over a 20-year period. He said fixing a dollar amount to the public benefit may not be appro- priate because of this gain to the City. Mr. Haws said as he understood what was happening, the City has set up certain criteria for development, and this developer had met those criteria. If the criteria are not clear, the burden should not be placed on the developer. The builder has complied by providing facilities for the handicapped and he saw no reason to not approve this application. Mr. Landress reviewed for Council their commitment through the 1990 Plan to high-density housing in the downtown core area. He said the original design had been changed from single apartments to a traditional mix to encourage more family living. He appreciated Mr. Lieuallen's comments, although he felt the existing developments were attractive and noted everyone does not view them in the same light. He reviewed for Council the requirements for public benefit, noting open spaces will be provided, handicapped facilities will be provided, and a laundromat open to the general public. He also reviewed for Council the complicating factor of getting financial support of over a million dollars for this development. He said it has been designed by a reputable architect, and he does have financial backing, and has a commitment to build the project. He also noted the financial lender was aware of the regulations, but would not give any additional monetary consideration to any kind of tax relief. He said the main point he wanted to make for Council was that he has honestly and sincerely tried to comply with the law and with the City's require- ments, that he does have financing to proceed with the development; there is a need for high-density housing, and he requested City Council to act favorably. In his estimate of the cost of public benefits, he outlined the following: Five units for the handicapped for $10,000; three pocket- park spaces for $21,000, rehabilitation of four houses for $50,000; removal of houses for $10,000, coming to a conservative total of $91,000. . 1/18/78--7 3~