02/08/1988 Meeting (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e e e Mr. Leahy said he thought development of the property was needed. He said many lots often could be seen in the metropolitan area, but builders had discovered that it was much cheaper to build on flat land than to build on hills. Consequently, he said, few lots could be found available in the Ferry Street Bridge area, and prices there were beginning to skyrocket. He said lots were available in Springfield and in Danebo, but not all demand was for those areas. Mr. Leahy said very few houses in the River Road area were less than 12 years old, which meant that not much development had occurred in that time. He said a recent development in the area had required dividing a three-acre lot in a way that never should have occurred because it ruined the property. Failure to allow proper development, he said, would result in more instances of property being ruined from improper development. Mr. Leahy said he had been frustrated trying to develop properties in the area for the past ten years, and he thought it was time to start offering people a way to do things instead of telling them why nothing could be done. He said the proposed development probably would take two to three years, but the zoning needed to be known before money was spent. Mr. Leahy said he expected the council tonight to hear many excuses why the request should wait, but he thought they had been waiting long enough, and it was time to get moving. Harold Chapman, 51 Chapman Drive, spoke against the request. He referred councilors to a handout and a letter distributed last week from a majority of the River Road/Santa Clara Citizen Advisory Team. Mr. Chapman said the issue tonight was somewhat different than previous annexations before the council in that this was the first time it had considered an undeveloped parcel bordering the urban growth boundary in the Santa Clara area. Mr. Chapman said the first two pages of his handout from tonight had been submitted to the Planning Commission, but because only the cover of the Planning Department's annual report had been included in some copies, he resubmitted two pages to make sure that Page 7 of the report was made part of tonight's record. Mr. Chapman said Section 9.158, subparagraph 2b of the Eugene Code required that for approval of annexation, it must be found that public services and facilities can be provided as described not only in the Metropolitan Area General Plan but also as described in the applicable refinement plan. The applicable refinement plan tonight was the River Road/Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan, he said, and the plan required that as annexation occurred, IIEugene shall provide for a level of police service comparable to that received in the remainder of the City." Mr. Chapman said he did not believe the required level of police service could be provided to the property proposed for annexation. No regular beat existed in the area, he said, and last Monday Eugene Public Safety Director Ev Hall had told the Planning Commission that the six officers to begin a regular beat in the RR/SC area would not be hired until 1,000 homes in the area were annexed. He said Mr. Hall also had stated that until that time, annexations would be diluting police service to current MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 8, 1988 Page 25