Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
<br /> e Ms. Schue indicated that while a park would be desirable in this area, the <br /> City does not have the money to acquire the property at the present time. <br /> Should the City refuse the request for annexation, the property owner would <br /> not be able to develop this property. She asked whether the City could incur <br /> liability for refusing this request. Bill Gary, City Attorney's Office, <br /> responded that it is possible, but unlikely, that the property owner would be <br /> able to hold the City liable for denial of annexation. He noted that to date <br /> no precedent has been set for this case. He advised that if the council <br /> wishes to deny this request for annexation, the denial be directly related to <br /> the criteria presented in the ordinance. <br /> Ms. Ehrman inquired about additional costs incurred by the City as a result <br /> of island annexations. Ms. Czerniak said that the City does not incur any <br /> extra cost. Property owners in this area will be assessed for the sewer <br /> extension once a connection schedule has been adopted for the Santa Clara <br /> area. <br /> Mayor Miller opened the public hearing. <br /> Bart Bardwell, 1142 Willagillespie Road #7, testified on behalf of the <br /> property owner in favor of this request for annexation. He said that the <br /> piece of property in question meets the criteria necessary for annexation and <br /> is consistent with surrounding properties in this area. He noted that <br /> approval of the request for annexation does not preclude the opportunity for <br /> either the PARCS Department or Santa Clara residents to acquire this parcel <br /> of land for a park site. <br /> e Jerry Finigan, 1250 Irvington Drive, speaking on behalf of the Santa Clara <br /> Community Organization, testified against the request for annexation. He <br /> urged the council to consider the desperate need for parkland in Santa Clara, <br /> and said that the piece of property is one of the remaining parcels of land <br /> available for a park in this area. <br /> Mayor Miller closed the public hearing. <br /> Responding to Ms. Bascom's request for clarification, Ms. Czerniak said that <br /> the Parks and Recreation Master Plan addresses some parks issues for the <br /> River Road/Santa Clara area; a comprehensive study was not completed within <br /> this plan to identify all possible park sites nor the best park sites. <br /> Mr. Gleason said that general plans are not traditionally considered the <br /> basis for determining site-specific locations for the procurement of a park. <br /> Responding to a question from Ms. Ehrman, Ms. Czerniak said that this <br /> property was designated within the River Road/Santa Clara Urban Facilities <br /> Plan as low-density residential. <br /> Mr. Boles asked whether the City has a policy for land acquisition when <br /> conducting incremental annexations. Mr. Gleason said that in terms of land <br /> acquisition, there is little difference between incremental and comprehensive <br /> land acquisition. He noted that the City is in no way prohibited from <br /> e MINUTES--Eugene City Council July 23, 1990 Page 8 <br />