With spirited discussion, Greencastle Council moves forward with Tennessee Street duplex plan

The project calls for a four building, eight duplex site on Tennessee Street known as Willow Grove.

A proposed duplex project on Tennessee Street moved one step closer to becoming reality this week, but not before a lengthy spirited and sometimes heated discussion during the Greencastle City Council meeting Thursday night. 

While the council was to vote on whether or not an economic development target area should be created, discussion quickly turned to whether or not the city should grant a future abatement to the project.The discussion came after numerous reminders from Greencastle mayor Lynda Dunbar and Kristin Clary, Greencastle/Putnam County Economic Development Director, as well as Greencastle City Attorney Laurie Hardwick that council would not be voting on an abatement. 

The project calls for a four building, eight duplex site on Tennessee Street known as Willow Grove. The site is being developed by Chris Harcourt, of C&R Quality Rentals and each duplex will be just over 1,000 square feet with two bedrooms, two bathrooms and a garage. The property is located on the west side of Tennessee Street along State Road 240 and has been vacant for several years. The Greencastle Economic Development Commission recently voted 3-0 in favor of a positive recommendation to the city council to establish the economic development target area. 

"We introduced this project to you back in March in an executive session. There is a corner lot that was zoned commercial. It took two years to get rezoned and is rezoned residential 2 and that is for multi-use family housing. We are asking that you approve that it is eligible for a tax abatement. We are not asking you to approve tax abatement at this time," Clary told council. 

The motion passed 5-2 with councilmen David Masten and Vincent Aguirre dissenting, but not before a lengthy conversation centering entirely around the proposal of an abatement. With the approval being granted, the council will now hold a public hearing for an abatement and take up the matter of whether or not to grant an abatement at its August meeting. 

After the meeting, Aguirre shared with The Putnam County Post and Giant FM why he voted no. 

"I am not anti abatement, but if we are asking Greencastle residents to pay more in property taxes to provide corporate welfare, we need to demonstrate a public good, and this doesn't meet the criteria in my opinion. I want to make it clear that I believe approving this abatement would be a lazy decision. We have artificial barriers to development baked into our city code that inflate the cost of development and then we are asking the tax payers of Greencastle to give corporate welfare to housing developers to fix the problems we are causing. I ask my fellow council members to join me in taking action to remove parking minimums and minimum square footage for residential development. Some might argue that we are starting a comprehensive plan to determine these issues but most reasonable people should easily see we don't need to spend $200 thousand of tax dollars to have someone tell us what's right in front of us, we can remove our artificial barriers to help encourage development," Aguirre said. 

Masten, who represents the First Ward, immediately took issue with a portion of the proposed ordinance which stated the property had become "undesirable for normal development and occupancy because of lack of development, creation of growth, deterioration of improvements, or character of occupancy, age, obsolescence, substandard buildings, or other factors that have impaired values or prevent a normal development of property or use of property. 

Masten disagreed with the property being undesirable for normal development, stating the area sits near a $7 million assessed valuation, and he got support from Aguirre, who represents the Fourth Ward. 

"Two of the lots are currently being developed. I believe it is desirable for development," Aguirre said. 

Masten said both he and Aguirre represent portions of Greencastle that feature lower socio-economic households and he does not want his constituents helping to subsidize the tax breaks the developer would get should an abatement be granted. 

"Tax rates go up in areas that can least afford it. The point is this opens the flood gates for more and more and more. You and I know there are four or five sitting here watching this. If we pull assessed valuation out of here, our tax rates go up. We have so many things hitting us. We are going to put the burden on the folks in this community that can least afford it," Masten said. 

Clary said it is new assessed value and added that more homes in Greencastle means more families in schools and more money coming into the tax base. 

"The more gainfully employed people we have coming into our community with available housing, the more those taxes go directly to this unit of government to do your budget," Clary said. 

Masten said while there is a belief there is a housing crisis in Greencastle, that is not the case. 

"What we have is a cycle in real estate. We are on the backside of the cycle. Everyone says it's a crisis, it's a this, it's a that, no it's not. It's a cycle and you work your way through the cycle," Masten said. 

Clary disagreed, saying when she talks to potential employers, one of the biggest things she hears is a lack of available housing in Greencastle. 

"The number one thing they identify is workers, and those workers need a place to live. And if you talk to our major employers and there's still help wanted signs all over town. We are talking about rental housing and I am not making a statement that we want to turn into a complete rental community, because I don't believe that we do, but I will say rentals are still in great demand," Clary said. 

Masten said according to data, Greencastle is currently 42.3 percent renter occupied housing and the town is getting close to "critical mass" when it comes to renting.

"You just said you don't want that. We are close to that. I have no problem with the duplexes. I am all for them. I just am not for folks who can't afford to subsidize them to subsidize them," Masten said. 

Aguirre said he is not convinced the land is undesirable, especially when development is already taking place.

"It is one of the most desirable areas in our community," he said. 

Dunbar said she is aware of the fact Harcourt had to "jump through a lot of hoops" to build on the land and spent extra money along the way. 

"They've done a lot of extra work to make this be able to have four duplexes on there. It was difficult for them to build on," Dunbar said. 

Just prior to the vote, Masten said again he did not want people who cannot afford to subsidize the development being held responsible for subsidizing, prompting a heated back and forth between him and Clary. 

"We will have a parade of folks coming in and it is a bad precedent for this community," he said. 

Clary said the game played that is being played now by developers and potential businesses is if they do not get local tax breaks, they will look elsewhere. 

"If we don't want Greencastle to grow and we are happy with the status quo and where we are at, then maybe that is the route we need to take," Clary said. 

Masten disagreed with Clary's argument as both talked over each other to be heard. 

"That is your opinion, and that is fine, but all the conferences we attend and all the regional economic development projects we work on, everyone of them is getting subsidized," Clary said. 

Masten interrupted, saying when something is offered to someone else for nothing, there will be a line out the door of people wanting to get it. 

"When everyone starts saying why would we do something like this, this makes no sense, let's pull back and we are no longer attractive because it's so stinking expensive to live here..." Masten said.

Clary interrupted, saying she disagreed with the assessment that something is being given for nothing.

"That's unfair. They have done a lot for what they are asking for," Clary said before Dunbar interjected, calling for a motion on the matter.