02/28/1972 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Mr. Cleveland said the site has been approved for electrical. gas. and water services; has been approved by the State Fire Marshal's office; and there is no question about police service. Consideration is being given to private or management transportation provided by the facility. Lane County was asked for a conditional use permit and it was indicated it would be acceptable. It was determined practical to pump sewage effluent into the Sorrel Way trunk at the rate of 15 gallons perminute. Engineering estimates show actual consumption would be about 7.29 gallons per minute. Both the Elks Lodge and Masonic Lodge were questioned about joining in connecting to this system. but they were not interested. So the excess capacity which would have been avail- able for those two facilities will be available for development of the remainder of the Green property. Mr. Cleveland discussed further the management transportation system under consideration and statistics on homes for the aged and noise levels at this location. He said the Greens do in- tend to own and operate this facility and asked the Council's support for annexation. Manager said the Planning Commission minutes thoroughly covered the Planning Commission's recom- mendation to deny annexation. Planning Director said the Mayor's Advisory Committee on Aging recommends against this location for a home for the aged. He said although there was some testimony tonight not given previously a home for the aged even if the property is annexed will require a conditional use permit. The major issue still before the Council is annexation. . With regard to the Masonic Lodge property contiguous to the Green property. Planning Director said it was recommended for annexation because it was felt it was displaced from the downtown area by ERA and it is an institutional use not requiring same utility uses that a home for the aged would require. The same would apply to the Elks Lodge and the Boy Scout facility on Cen- tennial. The Planning Commission. he said. feels transportation criteria would be whether bus or automobile transportation is available. He called attention to the fact that the area peti- tioned for annexation is greater than necessary for just the home and some plans have be€'Jlnoted for multiple family housing in this area. Annexation would be considered very critical with regard to the City's obligations because of serious problems arising if multiple family housing were constructed. There are existing health hazards in other parts of the City which need attention now. Councilman Williams asked if there have been other instances of requests for annexation of areas contiguous to the City and clearly within the urban service boUndary where the recommendation has been against annexation. Planning Director named several instances where such has been the case. but said in each instance the annexation was delayed at the Planning Department level be- cause the petitioner agreed the request was not valid. He said most of those requests were outside the City's present sewer service area. Upon question from Mr. Williams. Planning Di- rector said the area under consideration is within the urban service boundary. Upon question from Mrs. Beal, he said other services not available were sidewalks, bus service. schools on that side of the freeway. He said although the sewer can be provided under a unique service. if there is any increase in density there would be no sewer available and no time schedule for one es- tablished. In answer to question from Mrs. Beal, Manager said the annexation petition is for 13.5 acres. and the area proposed for use for the home is four acres. He said Mr. Green's attorney indi- cated some sewer capacity over and above the needs for the home, but it is not known what de- velopment is proposed for the other 9~ acres. e Mrs. Beal wondered whether it would be wise to annex seven or eight acres to be used for other purposes which may want services not now known about. even though at this time the use proposed for a portion of the area has sewer capacity and will provide no stress on the schools. Mrs. Campbell asked if a conditional use permit was given by the Lane County Planning Commission. Mr. Cleveland answered a conditional use permit was granted, but not a temporary septic tank pe~t. He said there is no present commitment for use of the remaining property beyond the existing sewer capacity of 15 gallons per minute. Mrs. Beal asked if it would be practical to annex just the four acres intended for use for the home. Planning Director said it is possible. but if it is annexed a conditional use permit would still be required for a home for the aged. And that request would appear not to be dif- ferent from what is now being considered. He said it would not seem the Planning Commission can make a favorable recommendation unless there is a change in the recommendation from the Committee on Aging. Mayor Anderson said the petition was to annex 13.5 acres unless the petiUoner wished to change the request. Upon question from Mayor Anderson, Mr. Green said he has been working with the Committee on Aging and will continue to work with them so that if the area is approved for annexation, they can bring a favorable plan for a facility back to the Planning Commission. . Mr. Williams recollected from reading the minutes that under County zoning this facility was permitted. so if annexed it would have to be permitted in the City. Planning Director said that the minutes were in error and had been corrected at the Planning Commission's meeting. Mr. Mohr IOOveq seconded by Mrs. Beal to recommend to the 'Botmdary Commission cbnexa- tion of the Green property under discussion. Mr. MohI' asked if the item would be automatically referred for joint discussion with the Planning Commission. Manager said that that procedure applies only to zoning matters but it would seem appropriate in this instance. 41 2/28172 - 5