CC Minutes - 06/23/03 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

She said that at this time, the definition of needed housing was so broad as to include expensive large houses on five-acre lots in the south hills. Ms. Taylor asked for a definition of needed housing, and an explanation of what was not needed housing. She thought needed housing was intended to provide for Iow- and medium-income housing that would otherwise not be built. Ms. Jerome said that the State defined the term, and the City was not allowed to define it otherwise, except on a case-by-case basis using the exception process under State Goal 2, Land Use Planning. She reviewed the State definition, and said that case law resulting from a case involving the City of Ashland had indicated that high-end housing was also needed housing. Ms. Childs said that the issue of needed housing was examined through the Housing Needs Analysis done for the City's Residential Lands Study. That analysis involved all price and income levels. The City needed to provide for higher-priced housing as well as Iow-income housing. She said that the phrase had initially been narrowly defined but through the years, different interest groups had managed to get manufactured housing on individual lots and migrant farm worker housing included in the law as well. Mr. Kelly asked if the requirement for the four-minute emergency response time was included in the discretionary path. Ms. Jerome recalled that it was. She added that all the criteria were derived from the criteria applied to regular housing, and there was one provision related to general availability of services. Mr. Kelly requested a memorandum following up on his question. To the degree that it could be clear and objective, he wanted to provide the same provision in the needed housing path. Ms. Childs said that the criterion in question was very subjective. Mr. Kelly understood the objections raised by the Planning Commissioners to adoption of the four-minute response time map. He was trying to think of another approach. Ms. Jerome said that LUBA gave the City two options related to the provision, either to adopt a clear way of calculating the four-minute response time was, or adopt a map. Mr. Pap~ wanted the council to consider the long-term impacts of its decisions on the cost of housing in Eugene. Mayor Torrey called for a third round of questions and comments. It was Ms. Bettman's interpretation of the State statute regarding needed housing that it was up to the City to determine what kind of housing was needed in the community. She asked how that could be done. Ms. Jerome said that Eugene could do so by taking an exception under the State Goal 2 process. That involved an amendment to the City's comprehensive plan. She indicated she would provide the council with a memorandum on the topic. C.WORK SESSION: Eugene Goal 5 Riparian and Upland Inventory Neil Bj0rklund of the Planning and Development Department joined the council for the item. Ms. Childs and Ann Siegenthaler of the Planning and Development Department were also present. Mr. Bj0rklund introduced Mark Radabaugh from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), who was present to answer questions about the State's rules. Mr. Bj0rklund referred the council to a map showing the current inventory as recommended by the Planning Commission and a second map illustrating the probable impact of applying the safe harbor approach to the Goal 5 inventory. A third map was provided to the council showing all the land in the inventory that was publicly owned. MINUTES - Eugene City Council June 23, 2003 Page 6 Work Session