Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews Foxtail Meadows amendment that shifts units to lower income tiers, adds $301,440 in TIF
Summary
The Lincoln City Council heard a presentation July 14 on amendments to the Foxtail Meadows redevelopment plan that lower some units’ AMI targets, add more deeply affordable units and request an additional $301,440 in tax increment financing for Phase 1 subphases.
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Lincoln City Council heard a detailed presentation July 14 on amendments to the Foxtail Meadows redevelopment plan that lower some units’ area median income (AMI) targets, increase the number of deeply affordable rental units and add $301,440 in tax increment financing (TIF) for Phase 1 subphases.
Ernie Castillo, urban development department, told council members the overall redevelopment plan still aims for 650 total units, of which 647 are designated affordable under the plan’s existing framework. The current amendment adds Phase 2 and Phase 3 to the plan area and adjusts Phase 1 subphases 1C and 1D, shifting affordability levels to include more units at 60% AMI and at 80% and 90% AMI levels.
The change matters because the amendment increases the number of lower‑income units and reconfigures how Phase 1 is financed. Andrew Willis, representing Hoppy Development, said the “spoiler alert” of the amendment is “more affordable housing. And that’s really what the end goal of all this is.” Willis described the change as a reallocation of units across phases so that half of the development’s units target 60% AMI (rental) and the remainder are split between 80% and 90% AMI tiers.
Developer representative Ben Koontz described site layout and financing shifts. He said Phase 1A and 1B are complete and occupied (about 165 leased units) and that phase 1C will include for‑sale attached units financed partly through the Nebraska Affordable Housing Trust Fund and a Habitat for Humanity partnership. Koontz said the amended phasing responds to financing realities and national research on mixed‑income outcomes for children.
Clarifying details provided to council: the redevelopment plan, approved in February 2022, originally included 650 total units with a prior TIF appropriation of roughly $5,590,000 for Phase 1; the amendment increases Phase 1 TIF uses by $301,440 to a total not to exceed $5,891,440 and spreads that increase across four subphases. Castillo said phases 2 and 3 remain to be negotiated and will return to council for further approvals.
Council members asked for details about unit counts, phasing and site layout; Willis and Koontz answered questions about the mix of rental and for‑sale units, the presence of some commercial space in Phase 3 and the church parcel inside the plan area. The council did not record a final roll‑call vote on the redevelopment plan amendment in the transcript excerpt provided.
If approved in subsequent council action, the amendment would lower AMI targets on several Phase 1 units (for example, reducing a previously 120% AMI tranche to 80% and 90% AMI tiers) and increase the city’s TIF authorization for Phase 1 by $301,440. Castillo said Phases 2 and 3 will return for separate council negotiation and approval.
The council packet materials and the developer’s handouts were referenced during the presentation; planning commission approval for the plan amendment was noted as having occurred on June 11. The transcript shows council discussion and developer testimony but does not include a recorded final council vote on the redevelopment plan amendments in the provided segment.
Looking ahead, any formal council action to adopt the amendment, appropriate TIF, or execute the amended redevelopment agreement will show up on a future agenda and will require a recorded vote.

