Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> <br />Executive SummaryExecutive SummaryExecutive SummaryExecutive Summary <br />This report includes results from the Housing Tools and Strategies working group, convened by the City <br />of Eugene in fall of 2018. Working group members included thirty-six stakeholders representing three <br />broad categories; housing affordability, development barriers and community values. Carrie Bennett, a <br />neutral facilitator, managed the process using an interest based (collaborative) problem solving cycle <br />and a consensus model of decision-making (see Appendix A: Working Group Handbook). A team of <br />city staff and Strategic Economics provided technical and logistical assistance throughout the process. <br />Community members outside the working group could view results of each meeting online and share <br />their feedback via online forms and email. This community feedback was brought to the working group <br />before their next meeting. <br /> <br />The working group met four times for 3 hours each. The focus of each meeting was as follows: <br />• September 12- Orientation to the purpose and process. Telling the “story” to understand the <br />problem of housing affordability in Eugene. <br />• October 4- Continuation of the story, identification of interests, brainstorming of options to <br />address the challenge, and identification of areas where more data or information would be <br />useful. <br />• November 14- Prioritization of interests, data and information sharing, small group deliberation <br />over the list of options, straw poll for initial preferences. <br />• November 28- Continued small group deliberation, additional data and information sharing, <br />final discussion and voting. <br />Key FindingsKey FindingsKey FindingsKey Findings <br />Working group members agreed that the challenge of housing affordability in Eugene is indeed a <br />problem and one which the City can and should act to address. The group agreed that the impacts of <br />housing (un)affordability extends far beyond those experiencing the problem directly with negative <br />impacts rippling throughout the community. In considering possible solutions, the group was <br />particularly driven to find solutions that work, solutions that would put people in housing they could <br />afford. Other top interests included equity, meeting community needs, livability, partnership, and <br />sustainability. <br /> <br />The working group’s full list of considered options as well as their recommendations are included in this <br />report. The group reached unanimous agreement on one option; allowing for more multi-family <br />development along key corridors. Eight options received support from over 90% of the Working Group <br />and with no votes in opposition. Brief explanations for why working group members supported or <br />opposed the listed options have also been included. <br /> <br />Reflections on the ProcessReflections on the ProcessReflections on the ProcessReflections on the Process <br />Working group feedback on the process was very positive. Working group members lauded the civility <br />and thoughtfulness of discussions. They appreciated the mix of people in the room and the time taken to <br />address a complex topic. The greatest area of concern was that the group lacked time for more analysis. <br />Additionally, working group members expressed concern that their recommendations would not be put <br />into action and that Eugene’s problems with housing affordability would continue to get worse. <br /> <br />December 12, 2018, Work Session - Item 2