03/27/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-- Elaine Roccio, 2483 Blackburn, spoke as an individual supporting the annexation. She knew Mr. Hunter personally and had full faith in the manner in which he would develop property, citing deed restric- tions would probably be included to preserve the livability of the area. Mr. Saul said the Planning Commission had discussed this annexat.on at great lengths and it did determine the annexation was consistent with the City and Administrative Standards and Statewide Goals. Regarding the proceeding of concurrent annexation rezonings, he $aid that is a perfectly legitimate and acceptable procedure. Regarding Administrative Rule No. 14, he said it is the act of annexation that makes that a distinguishing point. He referred Council to Planning Commission minutes, pages I-A-7 and -8. Regarding the need for land, he referred to the Staff Notes. Regarding the testimony from the Southeast Firs Neighborhood Association, he said those concerns would be reviewed through the PUD process rather than at the time of annexation. James Bernhard, Planning Commissioner, was available to answer questions. - Mr. Lieuallen expressed concern for this type of annexation. In recent reports to Council, Ed Whitelaw had stated the city will need a development of multi-family units closer to the city. He questioned whether the housing needs or the city needed this type of development rather than higher density closer to the central area. Mr. Saul replied he had reviewed the specific written material on all these annexations with Mr. Whitelaw and Mr. Whitelaw had seen no contradic- tions between them and the forecasted supply and demand of housing. Housing needs will not be totally solved only by annexation, but both in-filling of the core area and annexation will have to be considered. He said with the PUD suffix, there is potential for multi- as well as single-family dwellings to be developed in this land. In rebuttal ,Mr. Farthi ng sai d regardi ng the vi sual impact, the property at the south end of the development would be right at the gOO-foot level and this would be the only portion visible from other parts of Eugene. He said the development of the other parts would not be visible. He reiterated that the City will be able to control the development through the PUD process and also that Mr. Hunter would be willing to sell some of the property to the City for park land. Regarding a buffer zone, he said the South Hills Study had established that at the 900-foot level. Regarding the critical areas of develop- ment, he said Public Works has a map of the South Hills area whi~h shows those critical areas and only a small portion of this develop- ment would be identified. Public Hearing was closed, there being no further testimony presented. e 3/27/78--11 ,BCf