My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/09/1979 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1979
>
04/09/1979 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2007 5:55:50 PM
Creation date
11/2/2006 5:34:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
4/9/1979
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Lieuallen said one of the most important issues for that neigh- <br />borhood is the maintenance of existing sound housing stock. He <br />felt it would be important to include consideration of that issue <br />within .the guidelines for the Hearings Official. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mr. Lieuallen, Mr. Uhlhorn said, <br />under 3-B regarding regional function and whose clientele are <br />drawn from throughout the city, the issue was a concern with <br />hospitals and clinics. Their concern was not with social service <br />providers. Mr. Fidanque said there is a doctor's office in the <br />neighborhood now that is primarily for neighborhood residents. <br />He sai'd the Organization saw a very clear distinction between <br />that and those uses which draw a clientele from the entire metro <br />area. <br /> <br />Mr. Lieuallen noted the neighborhood had worked hard to maintain <br />the zoning in the area and there had been zoning requests for <br />uses other than just neighborhood use. He expressed the concern <br />of the neighbors regarding increased traffic and the erosion of <br />the character of the neighborhood. He felt those important to be <br />addressed. <br /> <br />Mr. Lieuallen moved, seconded by Mr. Delay, to amend the motion <br />to include under Guideline 2: Uses that require removal of <br />sound, rehabilitable residential structures; and uses which <br />serve a regional function and whose clientele are primarily <br />drawn from throughout the city, the metropolitan area, or <br />Lane County. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Mr. Lieuallen felt that retaining housing stock in the community <br />was the most important issue. The second use to be included would <br />give the neighborhood some protection in that institutional uses <br />would be of a nature that are local attractors, rather than regional <br />in nature. <br /> <br />Ms. Miller supported including 3-A and 3-B as noted in Mr. Lieuallen's <br />motion under Category 2 in the guidelines. This would allow sub- <br />jecting those categories to more strict scrutiny. However, she felt <br />it might be appropriate to separate the two for Council discussion. <br /> <br />Ms. Schue was against inclusion of 3-B, noting the guidelines were <br />addressed not to doctors' and dentists' offices, but group care <br />facilities. In clarification of further discussion, Mr. Croteau said <br />dental clinics are not permitted as an outright conditional use. <br />Ms. Schue then said she had some concern about limiting the users of <br />facilities if they have to leave a neighborhood. <br /> <br />Mr. Lieuallen said he understood that was a concern of the neigh- <br />borhood. He noted there are different levels and types of uses, <br />i.e., alcoholic treatment centers. Those people would not neces- <br />sarily come from the neighborhood. However, the neighborhood <br />organization is more concerned about people who come to the neigh- <br />borhood on a daily basis, i.e., for counseling. <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />4/9/79--13 <br /> <br />20~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.