07/22/1974 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

" would affect young children who might be subjected to it. And in the event young married families rented units there, he wondered about school facilities. Mrs. Niven answered that it didn't appear everything had to be built to aceommodate all types of families. She - thought if the sound barriers proved successful ,at this location, they could be used in development with noise problems closer to schools to accommodate larger families. She said only 150 units were planned in this project and it wasn't proposed to solve everyone's housing problems at one time. She called attention to older school children living in the adj acent mobile park and in single-family homes, apparently without problems. (0980) Councilwoman Campbell asked Ms. Franklin if the Planning Commission would be willing to discuss modification of the 1990 Plan to correct designations that apparently were not in line with uses actually in existence in this 'area. Ms. Franklin answered that the Commission would discuss amendment to the Plan in this regard, but she thought it would be difficult to make any changes if this rezoning took place. She thought proper planning could be better accomplished if evaluations were made of the entire North Delta area in line with the Plan to determinewhether1there should be modification. (1007) Jim Saul, planner, said the statement ih the appeal that th~rezoning request was in con~ formance with the General Plan was erroneous in terms of its being automatically in confor- mance as a result of the Planning Commission's not making negative findings. He said the discussion in the Planning Commissionb~cause of the bulk, of material presented by the applicant dealt with providing low-cost housing. But he said that terminology was incorrect - the housing proposed would be moderate-income housing, a highly specialized segment of the total housing'market of the city. With regard to public need, the Commission's basic e difficulty with finding that the proposed rezoning was really in the public interest was consideration of relationship of this property to adjacent properties and' the activities in the general area - the whole range of characteristics associated with the gravel operation, County shops, and possible public service buildings. He said it would be wrong to say the Commission's decision would have been different had the County's decision with regard to a site for its landfill been known at the time this rezoning was under discussion. The Commission felt if this property was rezoned for residential uses it would basically commit that area to that type of development. And even though barriers were proposed for sound control, the same type of control, around other properties having potential for residential development would result in a dense perimeter of barriers around all the properties in that area. Further, he said, if the Blayney report was accepted, there was the possibility for residential units west of Delta Highway significantly separated from the industrial area which would make a healthier element of medium-density housing. , - ,.,,-- (1110) Councilman Murray wondered if it would be the Planning Commission and staff recommendation for 1990 Plan revision 'with regard to the overall area, to which Mr. Saul responded that a more appropriate recommendation would be that the Plan be considered for revision. In response to Mr. Murray's query as to what oppurtunit~e~ there were for further industrial kinds of activities east of the Delta Highway, Mr. S~uT described the existing uses on properties in the vicinity of the' subject' property and said there would be no limitation on industrial development on thoseproper,ties, zoned fori that. use'. He noted recent contacts e wi th County personnel indicated a public safety, building, was' contemplated for that area. The question of what would develop'wa~ "wide open", he said, depending upon the County's interpretation of the General Plan for that area. (1145) In response to Councilwoman Beal, Mr. Saul said that if the rezoning was approved the Connnission felt it would determine the use of that entire area because with the exception of the mobile home park east of Delta Highway all of the ar~a zoned RA was still vacant. (Ll 72) Councilman Hershner asked for staff c~mment on whether the estimated monthly rental of $134 plus the additional 'cost because of including sound barriers would consti tute lo~-income housing without government subsidy. (,Also wh~t de~ree of control the city would have to ensure the buffering and noise control p~oposed. Mr. Saul had no figures available on the average rental for low-income housing ~nits. He said that site review procedures would provide inadequate control for the development proposed, both for sound buffering and other factors. He said that if) it was, decided to change the zoning on this property, planning would reconnnend a density no higher than that allowed under R-2, and that PUD procedures would be absolutely necessary for design control and for review of relationship to adjacent properties. He added that site review designation provided only for review of those items specifically of concern to the Commission and the Council such as compatibility wit,h surrounding area, relationship among buildings in a development to protect open space, preservation of natural features, structural design, illumination, etc.' It was felt site -, review procedures would be "stretched" in trying to, control or meet all of the concerns with regard to this, specific development. (1226) Mr. Safley noted the 4ecision to deny the rezoning in the Commission was on a 3/2 vote and that the ~wo Commissioners strongly in favor of the change were not represented at this hearing. He called attention to the roads in that area.designed"to carry more traffic than actual count showed they were carrying, and noted this particular project would have two access points. He said he didn't mean to create the impression that this type project would solve the low-cost housing problem in Eugene, what he did mean was that the proposed 25& 7/22/74 - 3