02/26/1979 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

a number of very highly developed and desirable panhandle lots in Eugene. She referred to a sentence in which "substandard intrusion" was mentioned in the article. She wondered what that meant. By ~ requiring 18,000 square feet for a developed lot, she said that .., would mean the lot for panhandling would have to be 50-percent larger than existing lots for single-family dwellings. She also could not see where the ordinance spoke to double-panhandle lots. Regarding design review, she said some new houses on conventional lots could also benefit from design review. She noted it was costly, but felt it might be worth including. She felt it is no more appropriate for panhandle lots than for all new construction. Regarding the assess- ments, she wondered if this would relieve the front owners, or would the panhandle lot be paying part of the assessment, or would it tend to double the assessment. She felt in light of the adopted goals and policies, the City should adopt this ordinance even though she felt it to be a compromise. Nick Burburichh 2290 Cal Young Road, noted the ordinance would drasti- cally affect t e Cal Young area. Many people have property with ~ 17-feet access into the property, with perhaps up to a 1-1/4 acres to be panhandled. He said the ordinance increasing the width of an access to 20 feet would, in effect, mean those people could not panhandle their lots. He requested the Council not adopt the change in access width. He felt the people in the Cal Young area should be able to develop their land, just as owners of Valley River Center and other developments have been able to do so. Allen Whittington, 585 Oakway Road, represented himself and the owner ~. of property at 565 Oakway Road. They each own one-half acre, 419- .., feet depth, and the land was going to waste. The land is close to town, could be very useful, and is expensive property. However, it is land-locked. He noted with the change of access from 15 to 20 feet, with the building five feet from his house or property line, he would need 30 feet to panhandle his one-half acre. With the change from 15 to 20 feet, it would effectively block both pieces from being panhandled. He suggested an alternative of one-way street in and one-way street out, rather than a 20-foot drive. He also expressed concern that if he did panhandle, he would be paying a double assessment. He noted he had just completed paying for an assessment for Oakway Road. He said he could sell his property to the City for a park. Another consideration was for a unit trust to out-of-state college, which he is strongly considering. However, in deeding hlS half acre, his neighbor's half acre would be entirely unusable. He wanted to make use of his land, but said the change of access width would completely eliminate his property. Janet Calvert, 1062 Woodside Drive, spoke on behalf of the League of , Women Voters of Central Lane County. The group has consistently supported compact urban growth and feels that all neighborhoods should accommodate a variety of housing types. The group supports panhandle lots and other innovative methods of gaining greater density, especi ally in new areas. However, they urged Council to al ter the proposed ordinance to allow 14,000 square feet to be the standard e 2/26/79--10 115