02/12/1990 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Concerned with property owner rights, Mr. Holmer asked whether the church has the option of withdrawing the application at this time. Ms. Czerniak said that the petitioner has this right. Ms. Czerniak said that the extensive site review that deals with traffic impacts does allow the City to require a traffic study to be conducted and paid for by the owner and developer to determine the most appropriate access po'nts. Mr. Bennett said that in his understanding, although R-1 zoning has a density limitation, it does not necessarily suggest single-family housing. Selecting an arbitrary 100-foot strip inhibits overall site planning and suggests to neighbors the high probability of single-family house development where, in reality, it may only be part of an overall development with a slightly lower density. Mr. Bennett emphasized that in deciding property zoning, consideration should be given to the general plan designation as a medium-density site. Ms. Czerniak responded that the 100-foot strip was specifically recommended to ensure retention of the low-density nature of labona Drive. e Mr. Bennett questioned the Planning Commission's assertion that every effort should be made to buffer new residential development on the subject property from the visual and noise impacts of the Northwest Expressway and the Southern Pacific railroad tracks and asked whether the City should use site review criteria in this manner. Ms. Czerniak responded that a portion of the River Road/Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan, the refinement plan for this area, requires that site review criteria be applied to properties fronting the Northwest Expressway and the Southern Pacific railroad tracks so that visual and noise impacts can be minimized. Mr. Bennett indicated that many of the concerns that the Planning Commission is attempting to address through the attachment of site review criteria should already be inherent in the City Code. Responding to comment from Mr. Bennett, Ms. Czerniak said that Public Works requested the traffic study provision in the site review because of significant traffic concerns. It felt that by articulating the concern in the site review criteria and reserving the right to require the owner or developer to pay for that study, the City can address traffic concerns and provide for the best traffic circulation possible in that area. Mr. Bennett commented that many of the site review criteria are so subjective that it will be difficult for the City to ensure that they have been fully addressed. Mr. Boles asked whether it is possible that the City might incur liability by allowing development on this property which is adjacent to the Southern Pacific tank farms, a potential safety risk. Bill Gary, City Attorney's Office representative, responded that it is not likely that the City would be held liable for making such a zoning decision. e Inquiring about a point made in Ms. Czerniak's presentation, Mr. Boles asked which definition of wetlands is being used to classify these lands and what is meant by the phrase "willingness of the State to work with the current MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 12, 1990 Page 4