1982-08-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Session 1314, Minutes Page 3 August 23, 1982 as they have been drawn up. He moved approval, contingent on the plans being ful- filled as submitted. Mrs. Thompson seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Mrs. Metcalfe asked if the improvement was to be financed entirely with community development funds. Mr. Ollendorff said that was correct, and that the project was initiated before the City adopted its new street policy last spring. Mr. Lieberman added that there were no homes facing this street. RESIDENTIAL REHABILITATION TAX ABATEMENT The City Manager said the University City Redevelopment Authority (UCRA) has re- viewed two requests for tax abatement under the policies which were adopted by the UCRA and endorsed by the City Council for the granting of tax abatement. Tax abatement, resulting in the tax rate being applied to the present unimproved value of the property for ten years, with the property being assessed at 50% of the rate on the assessed value of the newly improved property for the remaining years of tax abatement, will be granted by the UCRA subject to City Council action. Legally binding agreements have been entered into by the owners and the UCRA, assuring that the improvements will be carried out promptly. In order for the work to proceed expeditiously, Mr. Ollendorff recommended Council approval at this time. 4 The buildings to be rehabilitated each have six units of two-bedroom apartments. The first request, for the building at 746 Eastgate, was for a twenty-year tax freezing. The second property, at 718 Limit, was recommended for a twenty-five year abatement, since this project will be to an even higher standard that the first. Together, the projects represent a commitment by the owners of more than $100,000, illustrating the increasing strength of housing development in Parkview Gardens, due in part to the effective programs instituted by the UCRA, the City Council and City staff in recent years. Mr. Ollendorff noted that an ordinance will be on the City Clerk's docket which authorizes the transfer of property neces- sary to meet the technical requirements for such action. He recommended that the ordinance be approved on an emergency basis in order to avoid excess cost from con- struction delay. He said all requirements previously established by the Council have been met by the applicants and the UCRA. Mrs. Metcalfe said both projects sounded excellent. She asked if the agreement carried with it a commitment on the part of the new owners not to use another form of subsidy in addition to the tax abatement. Mr. Ollendorff said that commitment had been received, although there was some question about its being legally bind- ing. Mrs.. Metcalfe said a way must be found to make it so, because she did not think City money should be used in projects of this nature unless there were bind- ing assurances that no other subsidy would be used. Mr. Ollendorff said both ap- plicants had indicated verbally and in writing that they would not use other sub- sidies (specifically Section 8) in addition to tax abatement. Mrs. Metcalfe said she would like to see the projects move ahead, but could not vote for them unless there was something legally binding to support the applicants' statements. Mr. 01- lendorff said he probably overemphasized the lack of a guarantee--he did not think any other federal subsidy would be used. He said this questionhad been submitted to several lawyers, all of whom said there was no absolute way to guarantee that another subsidy would not be used. Mrs. Metcalfe did not find that acceptable, and thought there must be some way of obtaining a firmer contract than just a written statement.