My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/12/1979 Meeting
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Minutes
>
Historic Minutes
>
1979
>
03/12/1979 Meeting
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2007 5:48:31 PM
Creation date
11/2/2006 5:33:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Minutes
Meeting_Type
Meeting
CMO_Meeting_Date
3/12/1979
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />e <br /> <br />M I NUT E S <br />EUGENE CITY COUNCIL <br />March 12, 1979 <br /> <br />Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eugene, Oregon, was called to <br />order by His Honor Mayor Gus Keller at 7:30 p.m., Council Chamber, March 12, <br />1979, with the following Councilors present: Jack Delay, Betty Smith, Eric , <br />Haws, Scott Lieuallen, Brian Obie, Gretchen Miller, and Emily Schue. Councilori' <br />D. W. Hamel was absent. <br /> <br />I. PUBLIC HEARINGS. <br /> <br />A. Concurrent annexation/rezoning property located east of Sweetbriar Street <br />and south of 43rd Avenue from County RA to City R-1 (Stimac/Folker/ <br />Jemp1eman) (AI 78-13) <br /> <br />Unanimously recommended by Planning Commission January 2, 1979 <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />Jim Saul, Planner, said that the annexation/rezoning involves approxi- <br />mately three acres that is vacant at the present time. If the annexa- <br />tion/ rezoning is approved, the owners intend to develop the property <br />as a continuation of the Sweetbriar Subdivision. The first phases of <br />the development have been plotted, and are in the first stages of <br />development on property immediately west of this site. He noted the <br />written findings for annexation include the City's normal standards <br />for evaluation of annexation, namely, that the property is within the <br />urban service boundary, and that annexation would be consistent with <br />current City policy. A full range of urban services can be provided <br />to the property, and the annexation would be a logical expansion to <br />the city. The Planning Commission findings review the proposed <br />annexation under the standards of the LCDC Administrative Rule, as <br />well as suitable Statewide Goals and Guidelines. Mr. Saul noted one <br />aspect of the annexation; it is important in order to provide an <br />adequate street pattern, not only for this property, but for properties <br />located to the south and to the east. The south properties are <br />already in the city. The other properties are not within the city at <br />this time, but are within the urban service boundary. A street <br />through this property is the most feasible way to provide access to <br />some of those properties. It is particularly important. <br /> <br />No ex parte contacts or conflicts of interest were declared by <br />the Councilors. <br /> <br />Staff notes and minutes were entered into the record. <br /> <br />Public hearing was opened. <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />3/12/79--1 <br /> <br />135 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.