Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer and staff say TIE for 216 Canal St. would increase taxes over current commercial use; committee forwards request
Summary
Developer representatives and staff told the committee that converting 216 Canal St. to residential with a five-year tax-increment exemption (TIE) would raise assessed taxes well above current commercial payments despite initial percentage abatements; the committee voted to send the TIE to the full council after reviewing rent comparisons and tax estimates.
The Budget & Finance Committee voted Dec. 11 to forward a tax-increment/ tax-exemption (TIE) request for 216 Canal St. to the full council after a second-round discussion with city staff and the developer.
Chair Stephanie Fante read an email from developer Jesus Trejo that argued the project's rents are already below 80% AMI and that forcing the smart growth overlay (which would require 20% of units to be subject to additional affordability rules and third‑party oversight) would add substantial administrative costs. Trejo said his project’s current rents are significantly below the city’s 80% AMI benchmarks and that overlay compliance would add recurring oversight costs that his submission estimates at about $22,500 per unit per year, increasing annual project expenses.
Trejo and Director McCarthy presented an analysis of tax impacts: the site currently pays about $45,000 per year as a commercial/warehouse property; staff and the developer estimated that upon completion assessed property taxes would be about $190,000 annually. Trejo explained the proposed TIE structure (50% abated first year, 40% second year, scaling over five years until full residential assessment) and said that even with the initial abatement the city’s receipts would be materially higher than the existing commercial use.
After the presentation and limited Q&A, the committee voted to forward the TIE/TIP recommendation to the full council with a favorable recommendation. The full council will review the detailed tax and affordability analyses before final action.
