Item 3A: Approval of City Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

A. Approval of City Council Minutes of July 27, 2009, Work Session; August 10, 2009, Work Session; August 10, 2009, City Council Meeting; September 14, 2009, City Council Meeting. B. Approval of Tentative Working Agenda. Mayor Piercy announced that action on this item was taken at the work session preceding the regular meeting. 3. ACTION: Resolution 4990 Denying a Multiple-Unit Property Tax Exemption for Residential Property Located at 1367 High Street (Pearl on Campus LLC). Mr. Ruiz provided a brief overview of the item. Councilor Zelenka, seconded by Councilor Clark, moved to adopt Resolution 4990 denying a multiple-unit property tax exemption (MUPTE) for residential property located at 1367 High Street (Pearl on Campus). Councilor Clark, seconded by Councilor Poling, moved to substitute “approving” for “denying.” Councilor Brown stated that he would vote to deny the MUPTE. He had approved an earlier MUPTE application because it achieved the necessary number of points and was supported by the neighborhood, fulfilling both requirements. He said the subject application was only halfway there; if it could not meet all of the technicalities, a property should not receive a 10-year property tax exemption. Councilor Pryor agreed that from one perspective the application did not earn all of the points, but in terms of the actual facility, the project earned the necessary points; the remaining 60 points were not available because the project was not part of the residential parking program. He felt it was a good project and noted the developers were willing to sign a binding agreement to fulfill parking program requirements. He said the project would result in $25,000 coming back onto the tax rolls and the council had approved MUPTEs for the developers in the past. He said the developers’ projects complimented the area, as was demonstrated by the neighborhood association’s unanimous endorsement. Councilor Ortiz recognized the role of MUPTEs in helping achieve density in certain neighborhoods, but she could not support the application because it failed to achieve the necessary points when other applications approved by the council had met that standard. Councilor Zelenka stated he would not be able to support the MUPTE application as it failed to meet the public benefit test. He said there were many ways to achieve 100 points and the technical issue identified by the developers was not the only path. Councilor Clark said he amended the motion because the developers had agreed to be part of the residential parking program and had also acknowledged that other decisions could have resulted in additional points, but those options worked against the goals of the neighborhood. He said the choices made for the project were more compatible with the neighborhood and consistent with many of the infill compatibility standards being considered by the council. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 9, 2009 Page 5