08/09/1982 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e not admitted to the program and that those who are admitted are required to meet defined performance standards. Ms. Brown urged the council to adopt the ordinance as well as the amendment recommended by the Planning Commission. Councilor Obie noted that the particular use of one portion of one parcel of PL-zoned land by Community Services of Lane County was not the issue before the council. He said that the council needed to consider the citywide implications of the ordinance and urged those testifying to address this issue. Richard Zeller, 5283 West Amazon, represented Lane County Direction Service, Incorporated, an agency working with the families of handicapped children to locate needed services. He said that his organization had applied for use of space in the Lincoln School building. He stressed the need programs such as Direction Service have for space that can be leased economically. He urged the council to support the ordinance. H. Marshall Peter, 29127 Gimpl Hill Road, represented the Eugene Commission on the Rights of the Handicapped/Disabled. He said that one of the purposes of that organization was to counter misinformation and discrimination directed at the handicapped. He said that the Handicapped Commission supported the recommendation of the Planning Commission, particularly that portion making certain uses of PL land outright rather than conditional uses. He felt that Community Services of Lane County fell within four of the defined outright uses listed in the proposed ordinance. He felt that City code should not prevent organizations such as CSLC from locating in a natural setting, such as that e offered in a residential neighborhood. He urged the council not to force these financially-strapped agencies to go through the costly conditional use process. Rose Wallace, 200 North Monroe Street, represented School District 4-J. She distributed copies of her testimony and referred to additional written testimony that the district had made at the Planning Commission hearing. She said that allowing uses such as those proposed under the ordinance before the council was an alternative to boarding up or selling surplus school properties. She said that the uses allowed in the ordinance would operate in the public interest. She said that under the terms of the proposed ordinance, some school buildings could continue to be used for educational purposes, such as vocational programs. Ms. Wallace said that some members of the public who testified to the Planning Commission said that the school district had not provided opportunities for effective public involvement in the decisions regarding use of closed schools. She said that the district disagreed and felt that the process had been a good one. She said that a Building Site Review Committee had been formed to review proposed leases in the school buildings and that information packets had been sent to City neighborhood organizations. She noted that the committee had agreed to postpone its decision on use of the Laurel Hill building to allow additional citizen testimony. Susan Neevel, 2680 Augusta Street, said that she represented the Laurel Hill Valley Neighborhood Association on the Building Site Review Committee. She said that the information provided by the school district to the members of that committee, as well as that provided to interested members of the public, was inadequate. She noted that she had learned of Community Services of Lane e County's proposed use of the Laurel Hill School not from the school district but from the neighborhood group. She said that the role of the Building Site Review MINUTES--Eugene City Council August 9, 1982 Page 3