Laserfiche WebLink
groups supported to encourage the development of affordable housing. Mr. McClauchlan replied <br />that Friends of Eugene did not support financial subsidies, but the use of a design review <br />process. Mr. Bruebaker replied that the Home Builders Association supported creation of ways <br />to make such housing attractive to developers. <br /> <br />Mr. Laue said he believed there were common themes in each of the presentations: <br />neighborhood involvement, use of design review, concerns about notification processes, and <br />flexibility. He said he hoped the Land Use Code Update would coincide with Growth <br />Management Study Policies adopted by the City Council. <br /> <br />Ms. McMillan expressed appreciation to Mayor Torrey for initiating the process which led to the <br />presentations received. She said she favored design review for development plans and that she <br />did not believe it needed to be an expensive process. <br /> <br />Mr. Fart said that he believed the presentations reflected the ability of diverse groups in Eugene <br />acting cooperatively. He commended the participating groups for bringing the community <br />together. <br /> <br />Mr. Farley expressed appreciation to the groups making presentations. He said he supported <br />giving the process for granting the update additional time and liked specific examples given in the <br />presentations. <br /> <br />In response to a question from Mayor Torrey, Mr. Belcher stated that representatives of 13 of 18 <br />chartered neighborhood associations had participated in the Neighborhood Leaders Council <br />study of the Land Use Code Update. Mr. Wostmann suggested that increased neighborhood <br />participation in all activities of the associations would be enhanced by increased budgetary <br />support for publication of group newsletters. <br /> <br />Mr. Conrad said he hoped the involvement of neighborhoods in land development could be <br />enhanced, as suggested by several of the presenting groups. <br /> <br />Mr. Tollenaar said he believed the presentations made would impact the final form of the Land <br />Use Code Update to be adopted. He said he also believed the October 1997 draft code came <br />closer to carrying out Growth Management Study Policies than the current code. <br /> <br />Mr. Van Landingham requested that additional specific examples showing unintended <br />consequences of the draft code be prepared by the presenting groups and the public. He also <br />requested that the City Council consider how the process for approval of the updated code could <br />be extended beyond the currently planned target of July 1999. <br />Mr. Meisner said he believed the broad interests and goals of the presenting groups were similar, <br />but that they had differing strategies. He said he supported design review practices and <br />providing for a slower approval process. <br /> <br />Mr. Lee said that he believed the presentations were another example of divergent views coming <br />together for common goals. He rhetorically asked if public policy could be effective in making <br />changes. He suggested that the City Council seek to empower neighborhood associations to <br />operate at a higher level, especially by providing additional resources for group newsletters. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council May 5, 1998 Page 5 <br /> Eugene Planning Commission <br /> <br /> <br />