Item 2A: Approval of Council Minutes

Home Browse Search

Dispersal Policy. He said the policy was aspirational in policy but aspirational did not mean “ignore.” It was a goal. Mr. Reeder emphasized that 43 percent of all family low-income housing in the community, which was the housing subject to the dispersal policy, was in the Sheldon region. He suggested that the council not make the decision a political one; he agreed the decision was a quasi-judicial decision and he believed the council needed to treat it as such. Mr. Reeder submitted written testimony. Keith Baskett , 2275 Lakeview Drive, said his road, one of two accessing the proposed site, was already very busy. The proposed multi-family developments would add hundreds of cars to the roads. He encouraged the council to visit the area and consider the conditions that currently existed. He said the Bascom Village proposal did not make sense and he believed it should be reduced in size and the infrastructure improved. He objected that the land was taken out of the tax base. He asked the council to take its time and make a good decision. Terry McDonald , 3062 Whitbeck Boulevard, St. Vincent de Paul, said there were many different kinds of low-income housing projects serving different populations and people self-selected for projects based on their need. He acknowledged that Bascom Village was on the periphery but there was still transportation connectivity. The majority of families living in such housing, which he characterized as workforce housing, had cars. He believed that future residents would self-select for connectivity to reach services depending on their situation. Families living in such developments tended to have only one car, which did not add as much traffic to the streets but still provided connectivity to nearby services. He said residents could shop at Wal-Mart, which was 1.7 miles away, if they chose not to shop at Safeway, which was 1.4 miles away. He acknowledged that a sidewalk on County Farm Road was needed and said St. Vincent De Paul would work with the City to provide it. He said that current lack did not take away from the fact the site was appropriate for needed housing. Ardel Wicks , 3369 Arlington Drive, said automobiles represented a large expense for low-income residents and he was concerned that Bascom Village residents would be dependent on automobiles because of the site location and inadequate bus service. He also noted the City’s own goals for reducing the use of fossil fuels. He understood the aspirational nature of the Housing Dispersal Policy but pointed out that it contained very real numbers and he was concerned about the large increase in the number of allowed units. He asked the council to consider the total impact of all development in the area. th Norton Cabell , 1456 West 10 Avenue, representing the HPB, provided a timeline of the actions that led to the site’s designation for medium-density residential use and noted that the neighbors received notice about the property’s annexation and rezoning. He noted the City’s outreach to the neighborhood and the HPB’s decision to slow the process to allow for more input. He believed it was impossible to satisfy everyone’s process complaints or to pick a perfect site. There would always be opposition. The HPB had discussed the neighbors’ concerns and concluded they were manageable and would be addressed over time. st Richie Weinman , 55 West 31 Avenue, submitted the Human Rights Commission’s written testimony in support of Bascom Village. He spoke of the need for low-income housing and commended the City for taking the interests of the entire community, not just the neighbors of a particular project, into account. He said such developments provided housing for thousands of households and were safe and positive additions to their neighborhoods. Residents would live on the site by choice, have automobiles, and decide where to shop and attend church. He said the “same tired arguments” used by neighbors had been used by residents opposed to other low-income developments but the council supported each one. Mr. Weinman said there had been no research or data to support the Housing Dispersal Plan’s aspirational goal of 60 units at any single site. It was a compromise worked out by the Planning Commission to balance City goals and policies. MINUTES—Eugene City Council November 21, 2011 Page 12 Public Hearing