01/25/1982 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- e e from downtown housing to economic development. This neighborhood was in conflict and developing blight. Four years ago, developers were talking about a shortage of buildable lots. Now things have changed and developers are holding lots. In looking at WUNRF, it is necessary to consider 20-year long-range needs of the city. The City's goal of a developed, concentrated, economically efficient neighborhood around the core of the city is a viable one, but housing opportuni- ties will be lost with this plan. The kind of neighborhood they are envisioning is what is on 12th Street now. When 12th Street is changed, the relationship of West University to downtown changes. Traffic and pedestrian flows have not been considered. Now 12th is strip-zoned R-4 between 11th and 13th, which are zoned C-2. Medical facilities could be located on 11th and 13th. There is already available land for expansion of medical facilities close to the hospital. No special considerations are needed. 12th Street is a stub street blocked by Sacred Heart on the east and and a church on the west. It is narrow and residen- tial. Ms. Mahler said that under this plan, 12th Street would become the same as 13th and 11th. Groups opposed to this plan were not opposed to the health care community, she said. The West University area can accommodate just so many cars. The new hospital wing has cut off bicycle traffic with no alternative transporta- tion offered. The plan increases conflict in the neighborhood. There is a weakness in the public service element of the plan. There should be facts and figures concerning R-3/R-4 redevelopment, and the relationship of the doughnut urban renewal area. Rezones are now done on demand. The patchwork the Planning Commission has made of the neighborhood plan is an ill-considered botch that causes more problems, and should be remanded to the Planning Commission. Harold Lannom, 460 East 15th Avenue, said this neighborhood has the highest den- sity and the lowest income in the city. Citizens pay more for housing there than in any other area of the city. The vacancy rate is lower. In this area, where people drive less, over 125,000 cars are driven through in one day. All this, plus observable urban blight, constituted factors for the neighborhood refinement plan study. The Planning Commission study has down-graded this study to an argument concerning clinics. Housing, not profit, is the issue. People live in substandard housing. West University Neighbors has been encouraged to accept the Planning Commission recommendation because housing will be an outright use in C-2, and the WUN concept is still in the plan. Mr. Lannom said that housing is already an outright use in C-2. Affordable housing that is needed cannot be built on this expensive land. It was too expensive for the clinics. The WUN concept is good. Legal battles and lack of funds make the chance for its survival poor. This recommendation would not solve the housing demand. As a refinement of the general plan, this document fails in objectives 5, 7, 9, 10, 15, and 20. It does not comply with the LCDC order of June 26, 1981: "Eugene and Springfield must amend high-density zoning regulations to exclude non-residential uses which may compete for development of high-density land, unless it can be proved that excluding these uses will not prevent high-density uses occurring on high-density land." The original draft plan conformed to all of the above. The Community Goals and Policies Document 1974, chapter 11, policy 3 was read. There are 19 acres of commercial land not producing tax income in the neighborhood. West University Neighbors have submitted a list of misconceptions to be made part of the public record. Mr. Lannom suggested the plan be sent back to the Planning Commission with directions to comply with the MINUTES--Eugene City Council Page 4 January 25, 1982