Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Multifamily Tax Exemption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews 12-year multifamily tax exemption for 505 Union Avenue adaptive-reuse project
Summary
City staff presented a 12-year Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE) proposal for a 64-unit adaptive-reuse housing project at 505 Union Avenue ("The Gibson"). Council discussion was limited; the item had been pulled for discussion from the consent calendar and proceeded toward adoption as part of the consent calendar.
The City of Olympia received a presentation on Feb. 25 about a proposed 12-year Multifamily Tax Exemption (MFTE) agreement for a redevelopment at 505 Union Avenue known as "The Gibson." Jacinda Stelches, housing program manager in the Community Planning and Development Department, told the council the project would convert underutilized office space into 64 studio and one-bedroom units that would qualify for the 12-year exemption under state-authorized MFTE rules.
The Gibson, presented by Stelches, would provide 64 residential units and use an adjacent parking lot with 55 spaces. As a 12-year MFTE project, the units must be affordable to households at 80% or below area median family income; Stelches said the 80% threshold for a two-person household is $72,150 gross annual income. She said the project would target studio rents of about $1,400 and one-bedroom rents between about $1,500 and $1,700. The project is in permitting, she said.
The MFTE program referenced during the presentation is authorized by state law and administered locally; Stelches told council the city offers 8-, 12- and 20-year MFTE options and that the 12-year program rules were updated in late 2023 to increase affordability requirements. Councilmember Gilman said he had been critical of the program in the past but called this project “the best sort of match” for the incentive.
The item had been pulled from the consent calendar for council discussion and was presented to the council during the meeting; the consent calendar was later adopted by voice vote. The presentation did not include a separate roll-call vote on this specific agreement during the discussion recorded in the transcript.
