Laserfiche WebLink
Speaking to Mr. Zelenka's remarks about the construction occurring near the University campus without <br />benefit of the MUPTE, Mayor Piercy said the neighbors believed the existence of the MUPTE <br />encouraged more growth in that neighborhood. She questioned whether such construction would happen <br />anyway and if the MUPTE might improve it, or whether the City would see less construction without the <br />MUPTE. <br />Mr. Zelenka did not think that the MUPTE necessarily fostered better construction. He believed some of <br />the construction outside the MUPTE boundaries was of higher quality than the construction inside the <br />boundaries. He added that University area residents were less concerned about the quality of construction <br />than they were about such things as on -site supervision, the inclusion of balconies in a development, the <br />inclusion of common areas and open space, and the provision of adequate parking. <br />Mr. Zelenka requested information about the number of units built both in and out of the MUPTE <br />boundaries in the last three years. <br />Mr. Zelenka proposed that the City Council consider establishing a tax exemption program to incentive <br />LEED construction of multi - family housing. City Attorney Glenn Klein indicated that only the State <br />could establish a tax exemption program, but the City could establish a tax rebate program for the <br />purposes cited by Mr. Zelenka. <br />Mr. Zelenka looked forward to discussing the linkage of the MUPTE, LEED, and the City's transit <br />corridors. He anticipated the transit corridors would be important to future development and what the city <br />looked like, so the strategies related to the corridors would be critically important. <br />Mr. Brown believed the council needed to consider the budget and the fact that the University area was <br />already one of the densest neighborhoods in the community. He thought the City needed to distribute <br />density more to maintain the livability of the neighborhood. Mr. Brown also believed the University <br />needed to take more responsibility for housing University students. That task should not be completely <br />left to private developers. <br />Mr. Brown supported the retention of the MUPTE in the downtown area. He also supported extending <br />the MUPTE to the Trainsong neighborhood. He suggested the Trainsong boundaries could be extended <br />farther up Highway 99 to support improved development in those areas. He reiterated his support for <br />ending the MUPTE in University neighborhoods. <br />Mr. Brown did not think that the lack of the MUPTE would result in slums given that developers had to <br />meet the Building Code and other quality construction occurred in the community all the time without <br />benefit of a tax exemption. <br />Ms. Ortiz did not mind taking more time on the issue of the Trainsong neighborhood and the boundaries <br />for that area. She hoped to see the critical mass of people that lived near campus replicated in downtown <br />and in west Eugene. She believed there was considerable redevelopment potential in those areas that <br />would benefit the community. She suggested the MUPTE boundaries go down 8 and 5 ffi avenues and <br />along both sides of Highway 99. <br />Mr. Clark did not object to delaying the addition of Trainsong pending more discussion. He continued to <br />believe that the issues of whether and what was built were crucial. He believed the MUPTE affected <br />outcomes in both areas. He wanted a comparison of what was constructed when the MUPTE was not in <br />place between 1996 and 2001 with what was constructed when the MUPTE was available to help answer <br />the question of its impact on construction quality. <br />MINUTES— Eugene City Council July 20, 2011 Page 7 <br />Work Session <br />