12/12/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

street pattern was established in 1974 as a result of the Zdroy e minor partition. It is common that property is developed as owners elect to develop, and sometimes it is not in an orderly fashion. He said there is no provision for notification in the Code. Mr. Lieuallen directed a question to City Attorney to respond to the concern raised by the neighborhood that the City is operating under the wrong procedures in a major versus a minor partition. Stan Long responded the Code describes the difference between the two in terms of whether or not a street is created. He said this was a question of fact which City Council had to decide. He said in a strict legal sense, the definition was Council's definition. Mr. Haws moved, seconded by Mr. Hamel to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission decision and adopt findings of fact. Mayor Keller requested City Attorney to clarify any reference made to the court case in staff notes and the appeal. Mr. Long said in that particular case, the city involved did not have a zoning ordi- nance and controlled 'land development through subdivision procedures. He said that case did not speak to a city like Eugene which has delegated power to a particular officer to make partition decisions. Mr. Lieuallen said it was not clear to him which course would be best to take in this particular case. He said it seemed there were e two major issues, one where property owners have certain size lots and the appellants who do not want more people and more traffic in their part of town. He said they were speaking to other technical deficiencies in the procedures to make their case: If the zoning were approved and whether the application had followed the procedures, or if there were errors in those procedures. He noted the City's policy to disperse intensity throughout the entire city. Mr. Delay said that he found the situation to be relatively clear. There would have to be a street network available if the land is to be developed, noting if it were developed it was up to the owners of the property. He found no reason to deny the appeal. Mayor Keller concurred. He said it was not certain that the pro- cesses were appropriate to serve all people, but following of procedures and processes was consistent. These issues have been raised many times, but it does appear there will have to be some type of road system developed in that area. Mr. Lieuallen said the situation could be looked at in terms of procedure, and also the general issue of growth and what it does to a particular neighborhood. The testimony indicated the people want to control what happens in their own neighborhoods. He said, however, City policies are determined by all citizens of the community and not necessarily what goes on in one particular neighborhood. e 12/12/77 - 8 ~Ol