07/22/1991 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e Mr. Rutan moved, seconded by Mr. Boles, to adopt the resolu- tion and final order. Roll call vote; the motion carried unanimously, 7:0. III. PUBLIC HEARING: ANNEXATION/REZONING REQUEST FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE SOUTH HILLS AREA, SOUTH AND EAST OF BAILEY HILL ROAD, WEST OF TIMBERLINE DRIVE (AZ 91-4) City Manager Mike Gleason introduced the topic. Carol Heinkel, Planning and Development Department, gave the staff report. She said that the code crite- ria summarized earlier applies to this request as well. This is a property owner-initiated request for a vacant parcel. The annexing area is contiguous to the main body of the city. The request includes about an eight-acre por- tion of a 200-plus-acre parcel, 73 acres of which was annexed to the City in 1980. The annexing area is part of a planned unit development (PUD) proposal before the city that includes the parcels already within the City. The Plan- ning Commission held a public hearing on the request and recommended approval and zoning to R-l/PD consistent with the portion of the tax lot already with- in the city. Mr. Boles asked staff to clarify the Planning Commission discussion with respect to the concerns about the impact of the development on adjacent for- est lands and the further reduction of agricultural land. In response, Ms. Heinkel said that the commissioners requested a map indicating the parcel's zoning in the county. Staff responded that the property in question is 10- e cated outside of the urban growth boundary and therefore not intended for urbanization. Responding to an inquiry from Mr. Green about opposition to this request, Ms. Decker explained that there is some discussion in the South Hills Study (the refinement plan for this area) about providing a buffer along the ridge1ine. In the past, the PARCS Department has attempted to acquire parcels along the ridge1ine between the area designated for urban development and the urban growth boundary for parkland. When property development occurs, the City will be working with the developer to provide open space within the develop- ment to address the relationship between urban densities inside the urban growth boundary and rural densities outside. The City has received no other opposition to the request. In response to a question from Mr. Boles, Ms. Heinkel said that all of the infrastructure needed to serve the planned unit development is currently in place or can be extended to serve the development site as part of the PUD process. Mr. Boles commented that the Systems Development Charge (SDC) should pick up the costs of extending the infrastructure up to the full cost of the SOC. Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. There being no requests to speak, the hearing was closed. e Page 3 MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 22, 1991