Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />property owner.1I Ms. Czerniak responded that the area has been designated as <br />a riparian zone, and that the State would require further area delineation if <br />development proceeds. <br /> <br />Jan Childst Planning and Development Departmentt noted that confusion has <br />been generated by the use of the term "setback.1I Although the term IIsetbackll <br />usually means an area in which no building can take placet the term IIsetbackll <br />in this case indicates the location of a zoning line. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Holmert Ms. Czerniak said that the Final <br />Order that the council is being asked to adopt is based on the Planning <br />Commission's recommendation. Council may want to direct staff to revise the <br />Final Order. <br /> <br />Mr. Green asked about the likelihood of a decrease in property value should <br />the zoning of this property change. Mr. Gleason said that if compatible with <br />the surrounding areat it would be unusual for development to denigrate the <br />property value. <br /> <br />Responding to a question from Mr. Miller, Ms. Czerniak said that the Metro <br />Plan designates the general area of this request for medium-density <br />development, the River Road/Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan seems to <br />indicate that a portion of this property phases into low-density development. <br /> <br />Mr. Gleason said that the Planning Commission has made an interpretation of <br />two documents which govern the same area. The council has the authority to <br />dispute this decision. <br /> <br />Ms. Ehrman remarked that it is unclear whether the recommendation for a <br />100-foot setback came from staff or from the Planning Commission. Ms. <br />Czerniak responded that during the public hearing the Planning Commission <br />raised questions about how to address some of the issues raised by neighbors. <br />The 100-foot strip zoned R-l was one option presented by staff. <br /> <br />Res. No. 4l64--A resolution furthering the annexation to the <br />City of Eugene and the Lane County Metropolitan <br />Service District property located in the River <br />Road area in the vicinity of Maxwell Road and <br />the Northwest Expressway. Withdrawal from <br />River Road Water District and River Road Park <br />District will be processed separately if the <br />annexation is approved. <br /> <br />Ms. Schue movedt seconded by Mr. Bennett, to adopt the <br />resolution. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimouslYt <br />7:0. <br /> <br />Final Order AZ 89-6--A final order rezoning Tax Lot 4306 from <br />County RA/UL to City R-2/SR and City R-l <br />and rezoning tax lot 4900 from County <br />RA/UL to City RA. Redesignation from <br />County Residential to City Residential <br />Sign District. <br /> <br />MINUTES--Eugene City Council <br /> <br />February 12, 1990 <br /> <br />Page 5 <br />