Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Developer asks CRA to reopen review of Gaines/Lorraine student housing tax-abatement request

5511691 · July 31, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Representatives of MDL Tallahassee asked the CRA board on May 15 to direct staff to re-evaluate a denied request for project assistance for a 184-unit plan at Gaines and Lorraine; staff said the denial cited CRA policy against spending on student housing.

Representatives of MDL Tallahassee asked the CRA board on May 15 to direct staff to meet with the development team and re-evaluate a previously denied request for project assistance at 730 West Gaines Street (corner of Gaines and Lorraine). Matt Bryant, representing MDL, told the board the site has a site-plan approval for a 184-unit multifamily development and that MDL’s April 22 request sought tax incentives in the form of a post-completion abatement on increased property taxes rather than CRA operating funds. "The current generation is about $5,000 in taxes," Bryant said, adding that after redevelopment he projects an assessed value that would generate about $243,000 in annual taxes. Bryant said the property is a contaminated parcel with higher-than-normal construction costs and that the CRA sunsets in 2034; MDL anticipates project completion in 2028–29 and argued an abatement would reduce developer risk and encourage redevelopment. He said his firm asked only for a tax-abatement mechanism and not for direct CRA funding. A staff member told the board the request had been denied because "CRA funds are not expended on student housing." Bryant replied that MDL was not seeking CRA operating dollars. The board did not adopt a motion to overturn the denial. The mayor and other members discussed that MDL could take the proposal to the Design Review Committee (DRC) or present a fuller application; later in the meeting staff encouraged MDL to pursue DRC review and clarified the DRC and CAC processes. Why it matters: The site is inside the downtown CRA boundary and MDL’s representative argued redeveloping a contaminated parcel would increase tax revenue substantially; the denial on student-housing grounds raises policy questions about whether tax-abatement tools apply when projects serve student populations. Next steps: Board members encouraged MDL to present its materials to the DRC and to consult with staff; no new CRA financial commitment or change in policy was adopted at the meeting.