Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
<br /> - restrictive in the placement of additional housing. The Planning Commission <br /> recommends adoption of the plan on an interim basis, with additional review <br /> in 1993 when 1990 census data is available for evaluation. Ms. Johnson <br /> emphasized that staff and the Planning Commission believe the impact of the <br /> change will be small. <br /> Answering a question from Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Johnson said that block group <br /> reporting was based on information from the 1980 census. <br /> Councilor Bennett opened the public hearing. <br /> Laurie McClain, 245 North Polk Street, spoke against the proposal to change <br /> the definition of low-income families from those with incomes at 80 percent <br /> to those with incomes at 50 percent of median income or below for the area. <br /> Ms. McClain maintained that the central neighborhoods already have a good <br /> proportion of affordable housing and she was concerned that the City fails to <br /> provide the same level of services (such as recreation programs) in those <br /> areas as it does in other residential areas. She urged the council to avoid <br /> action that will create economic segregation by neighborhoods. <br /> John Van Landingham, 1172 West 5th Avenue, reviewed some of the Planning <br /> Commission's considerations in making its recommendations: 1) low-income <br /> housing is difficult to place anywhere; 2) L-COG data indicates that nearly <br /> half the population are tenants and nearly 80 percent of them qualify as <br /> low-income under the 80-percent-of-median-income standard; 3) low-income <br /> residents already live in those neighborhoods where the policy would prevent <br /> e new low-income housing; 4) Community Development Block Grant funds are a <br /> primary resource for helping low-income people, and use of these funds is <br /> limited to low-income neighborhoods; and 5) the existing policy may violate <br /> 1988 amendments to the Federal Fair Housing Act in that it discriminates on <br /> the basis of the presence of children. Mr. Van Landingham did not support <br /> creating concentrations of low-income families in one location and favored <br /> working to disperse people around the community to make all neighborhoods <br /> open to all persons regardless of their income level. Noting that the data <br /> on which the old policy is based is outdated (from the 1970 census) and that <br /> the Federal programs which existed in the 1970s and were targeted at private <br /> developers no longer exist, Mr. Van Landingham urged the council to accept <br /> the Planning Commission's recommendation to adopt a new policy that promotes <br /> choice rather than prohibits development. <br /> Richard Guske, 59 North Jackson Street, said that one of the goals of the <br /> Community Development Block Grant program is to prevent the concentration and <br /> isolation of low-income persons in specific areas of the community. Mr. <br /> Guske's impression was that most Whiteaker area homeowners would prefer that <br /> no additional low-income housing be located in their neighborhood. He <br /> recommended addressing the larger questions facing the community by <br /> developing a policy that reflects the community's decision as to what kind of <br /> community it wishes to be. <br /> Al Johnson, 3970 University Street, concurred with Mr. Guske's recommendation <br /> to address the situation in a more comprehensive way. He criticized the <br /> e MINUTES--Eugene City Council June 25, 1990 Page 6 <br />