Laserfiche WebLink
Action Priority: Prioritize and implement next steps in Growth Management <br /> <br />There was no objection from the council to a suggestion from Mr. Kelly to delete the second item under <br />Resource, timing or other issues. <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman referred to the third item under Resource, timing and o&er issues and suggested that <br />prioritization of items in the post-Land Use Code Update work program could be done prior to the effective <br />date of the code. Mr. Johnson said that any confusion would be cleared up later in the week when the council <br />made a decision on the effective date of the Land Use Code Update. <br /> <br />Referring to the first work plan item, Develop a funding, implementation, and regulatory plan for nodal <br />development, Mr. Farr said the Bethel Triangle in west Eugene had the potential to become a node. He <br />thought it was also suitable for inclusion in an urban renewal district, and hoped the discussion of that <br />possibility would first occur at the Planning Commission. He said urban renewal would be a way to move <br />forward to improve the area in question. <br /> <br />Mr. Papd noted PeaceHealth's announcement to move to north Eugene since the development of the council's <br />goals and suggested that move should be addressed in the work plan. Mr. Johnson said that staff could <br />develop language to recognize the effort that would be devoted to the move. There was general concurrence <br />that staff would develop another work plan item. <br /> <br />Action Priority: Foster affordable housing, including subsidized low-income housing <br /> <br /> Ms. Bettman, seconded by Mr. Kelly, moved to amend the work plan by <br /> modifying items 1, 2, 3, and 4 by replacing the word "affordable" with the <br /> words "very Iow-income and Iow-income." <br /> <br />Ms. Bettman believed the City needed to direct its limited resources where it could do the most <br />good. She said the affordable monthly housing payment for someone of median income, <br />including utilities, was $1,085; for 80 percent of median, it was $727; and for 50 percent of <br />median, it was $485. The two latter figures were specific to the Iow-income and very Iow-income. <br />Someone earning minimum wage on a full-time basis could afford a house payment of $338, far <br />below the 50 percent figure. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly pointed out that "low-income" encompassed "very Iow-income," and suggested as a <br />friendly amendment that the motion read "low-income." Ms. Bettman accepted the friendly <br />amendment. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart said that the need for housing affordability was not limited to the very poor. Those at the <br />median income need assistance with housing as well. He said that the City's efforts needed to be <br />more across-the-board, and for that reason opposed the amendment. <br /> <br />Referring to item 2, Fulfill the goal of creating 100 units of affordable housing, Ms. Nathanson <br />noted that the City's efforts in providing affordable housing were often in reaction to the <br />opportunities it was presented with. She said that sometimes a housing project was not strictly <br />income-related, but focused on special needs, such as housing head-injured individuals. Those <br />developments generally fit the definition of Iow-income. She did not want to eliminate such <br />opportunities in the future and asked if they were included in the 100 unit goal. Mr. Johnson said <br /> <br /> MINUTES--Eugene City Council April 23, 2001 Page 11 <br /> Work Session <br /> <br /> <br />